Samsung might just be overplaying its hand. If they're in the right why are they going to such lengths to win over the public? It's quite pathetic. It's not like Samsung is this tiny company and Apple is the big bully. If publicly releasing excluded evidence is illegal the judge shouldn't let Samsung get away with it.
Well, it's even worse than that. By that point in the middle of the last decade, Apple already had iPhone designs which looked a lot like what would eventually become the iPhone 4 - the rounded corners, flat front and back, bezel size, home button, side switches, the works. It appears one of their designers then decided to conduct a thought-experiment, "What would this design look like in Sony drag (circa 1983)." So they added a few old skool Sony-styled buttons and switches to it, and that little Sony-esque knob.
None of which I might add ever made it into either the original iPhone, the iPhone 3G or the iPhone 4.
These are common design exercises - "How would Sony do it?" "How would Le Corbusier do it?" "How would Geiger do it?". The difference is Apple never released and never attempted to make money from this homage, whilst Samsung manufactured their Apple-copy and made money from it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Why don't you explain what Apple has done that's the equivalent of violating a direct order from a judge - not once, but twice?
I don't expect a direct answer to this, only more weasel words from DaHarder.
SEOUL, South Korea, Nov. 19 — Samsung, which has vigorously denied bribery charges in a snowballing corruption scandal, sustained another blow to its image on Monday when a former legal adviser to President Roh Moo-hyun said the company had once offered him a cash bribe.
The former aide, Lee Yong-chul, who also served as a presidential monitor against corruption, said that the money — 5 million won ($5,445) — was delivered to him in January 2004 as a holiday gift from a Samsung Electronics executive, but that he immediately returned it.
Before sending it back, Mr. Lee said, he took pictures of the cash package, which were released to the news media on Monday.
“I was outraged by Samsung’s brazenness, by its attempt to bribe a presidential aide in charge of fighting corruption,” Mr. Lee said in a written statement released at a news conference by a civic organization. He did not attend the event.
James Chung, a spokesman for Samsung Electronics, said, “We are trying to find out the facts around these allegations.”
Samsung Electronics is the mainstay of the 59-subsidiary Samsung conglomerate and a world leader in computer chips, flat-panel television screens and cellphones.
Mr. Lee’s accusation appeared to support recent assertions by a former chief lawyer at Samsung, Kim Yong-chul, that the conglomerate had run a vast network that bribed officials, prosecutors, tax collectors, journalists and scholars on behalf of Samsung’s chairman, Lee Kun-hee.
Prosecutors are investigating Mr. Kim’s accusations, and political parties have introduced legislation that would establish an independent counsel.
Opposition political parties say an independent prosecutor is needed because Mr. Kim identified the president’s new chief prosecutor, Lim Chai-jin, as one of many prosecutors to have received bribes from Samsung. Mr. Lim denied the assertion.
President Roh’s office dismissed the call for an independent counsel as an election-year political maneuver. The South Korean presidential election is scheduled on Dec. 19.
As the scandal expanded, the chairman, Lee Kun-hee, was absent Monday from a ceremony commemorating the 20th anniversary of the death of his father, Lee Byung-chul, Samsung’s founder. Company officials cited a “serious cold and illness from fatigue.”
Lee Yong-chul, the former presidential aide, now a partner at a law firm in Seoul, issued his statement and pictures through the National Movement to Unveil Illegal Activities by Samsung and Its Chairman, an organization that was started by civic groups after Mr. Kim’s allegations were made public.
Calls to Mr. Lee’s office were not returned on Monday.
“This is proof that Samsung’s bribery has reached not only prosecutors but the very core of political power, the Blue House,” the group said at the news conference, referring to the South Korean presidential office. President Roh’s office called that assertion “pure speculation.”
Mr. Lee said the bribe he received in 2004 was delivered after an executive at Samsung Electronics asked him whether his company could send him a holiday gift. Mr. Lee said he accepted, thinking that it would be a simple gift.
He said that when he returned the money with a protest, the Samsung executive apologized. The executive said he had simply allowed his company to send the gift in his name and had not known it contained cash, Mr. Lee related.
The executive could not be reached for comment. Samsung said the man left the company in June 2004 and now lived in the United States.
Lee Yong-chul said he decided to go public after reading about the lawyer Kim Yong-chul’s whistle-blowing. He said he believed Mr. Kim’s assertion that Samsung had run a systematic bribery effort.
Samsung has denied Mr. Kim’s allegations as “groundless.” A couple of Samsung executives Mr. Kim accused of delivering bribes have sued him.
In his statement, Lee Yong-chul said the cash was delivered to him while prosecutors were investigating assertions that Samsung and other conglomerates had provided large amounts of illegal campaign funds to presidential candidates during the 2002 election, which Mr. Roh won.
Several campaign officials for Mr. Roh and his opponent, Lee Hoi-chang, as well as Samsung executives, were convicted of playing major roles in raising slush funds in that campaign.
Bribery, Massive Corruption at Samsung, Says Exposé by Former S. Korean Prosecutor
. . . In addition, a lawmaker said she had once been offered a golf bag full of cash from Samsung, and a former presidential aide said he had received and returned a cash gift from the company.
Lee Kun-hee, the chairman of Samsung, was convicted of hiding more than $42 million from tax collection, and received nothing more than a suspended sentence. The media decided not to mention the whistle-blowing book at all, despite it achieving remarkable sales for a non-fiction book in that country. (Not a single newspaper published a review, and the only discussion of the book mentioned its sales--but not its title or author. Yeah, you read that right. They left out the title.) Even worse, the media refused to print any op-eds or articles explaining, let alone backing, Kim Yong-chul's side, out of fear that Samsung would pull advertisements from their TV shows and newspapers.
Samsung has been publicly forced to get its act together to stamp out corruption, with the South Korean government choosing to make an example of it.
According to a top industry consultant familiar with the company, Samsung's legal "philanderings" are no secret. While other companies are also at it, the South Korean government is keeping them safe as it looks to drive revenue and reputation to the country.
The comments come as news of shadiness inside Samsung spreads, after an inspection found that elements of the company were involved in corruption.
The findings led to CEO Oh Chang-Suk stepping down and Lee Kun-Hee, chairman of the company, claiming there would be some managerial changes.
However, he would not specify what the investigation had uncovered - only saying that it included taking bribes and enjoying hospitality from suppliers. He said the "worst type" of abuse was pressure on junior staff to commit corrupt acts.
"Corruption and fraud" at Samsung Techwin came about accidentally, and was a result of a "complacent attitude during the past decade", he told reporters
This isn't the first time Samsung has been alleged to have its hands in the till. In 2007 the company's former executives accused it of bribing police and politicians to stop probes into its management, while in 2009 the chairman, along with nine other senior executives, were indicted on tax dodging charges.
According to our analyst, speaking under condition of anonymity, these are well known facts.
"Let's be honest, Samsung's philanderings are not a secret, the company has been at it for years," he said.
Then how would you explain the pictures of the phones that were made available to all that predate the original iPhone?
If a biased judge won't allow it they let it slip to the press to get a fair trial. This puts Judge Koh on the hot seat and all but guarantees a retrial if Samsung loses, they knew exactly what they were doing. That's why the GS3 is the hottest selling phone in the world.
This is clearly a case of Contempt of Court. You can go to prison for that - indefinitely. Someone should too, Samsung have been playing this case (and others) in the media to poison the public against Apple and for Samsung. I hope the Judge smacks them down - hard.
Part of that smack might be to let the jury be told what Samsung did and how it is contempt etc.which will leave a bad taste in the collective mouth and could hurt things for Samsung
Just how old are you? I've been viewing AppleInsider for years and you are by far the most juvenile, biased and sophomoric moderator I've ever read.
From the comments on an average day I feel like I'm reading the Cartoon Network and not a tech site.
If you have been hanging around that long then you might have noticed that it helps at least to indicate who you are responding to, if not actually quote the post.
Then how would you explain the pictures of the phones that were made available to all that predate the original iPhone?
If a biased judge won't allow it they let it slip to the press to get a fair trial. This puts Judge Koh on the hot seat and all but guarantees a retrial if Samsung loses, they knew exactly what they were doing. That's why the GS3 is the hottest selling phone in the world.
It was a brilliant move by Samsung.
How old are you? That's not how it works. Disobeying a judge doesn't put the judge on the hot seat, it puts you in jail. It's more likely a desperate PR move because it is irrelevant to the case whether Apple copied Sony.
Well Christopher Stringer is famous now. I wonder which other designers will be called to testify? Having all these designers testify might benefit Apple more than Samsung, I read some of this stuff and think 'wow that would be a cool place to work'.
San Jose, California: Apple Inc’s celebrated industrial design team is a group of around 16 “maniacal” individuals from all over the world who spend a lot of time brainstorming around a kitchen table.
The world’s most valuable technology corporation on Tuesday allowed a rare glimpse into a zealously guarded internal hardware design process that has produced some of the world’s most celebrated consumer electronics.
In a high-profile US patent infringement trial against Samsung Electronics Co Ltdthat began this week, it called 17-year Apple design veteran Christopher Stringer as its first witness.
Stringer looked every inch the designer with his shoulder-length hair, salt-and-pepper beard, wearing an off-white suit with a narrow black tie.
“Our role is to imagine products that don’t exist and guide them to life,” he told the jury.
Apple’s products — particularly the seminal iPhone — are held in high regard throughout the industry. The gadget that revolutionised the smartphone industry is prominently displayed in the avant-garde San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.
The company, which is accusing its South Korean arch-foe of stealing iPhone and iPad design and features, owes a debt to creative guru Jonathan Ive and his cadre of designers a s sembled from Britain, Australia, the United States, Japan, Germany over more than a decade.
Stringer said Apple’s group of 15 to 16 industrial designers — headed by the British-born and recently knighted Ive — work on all of the company’s products and dedicate time every week to discuss them, mostly at the kitchen table.
That’s where the group is “most comfortable,” he said.
Ive’s team leads works out of a large, open studio on Apple’s campus in Cupertino, California, with music blaring through a giant sound system and access strictly limited to a small portion of employees, according to a 2006 profile of Ive in Business Week.
BRAINSTORMING
Most of the team have worked side-by-side for 15 to 20 years, said Stringer, who has “hundreds” of design patents to his name.
“We have been together for an awfully long time,” Stringer said. “We are a pretty maniacal group of people. We obsess over details.”
Over the years, the team earned a reputation for blending the aesthetically appealing with the functional. Stringer worked on the original iPhone — internally codenamed M-68 — and almost all of Apple’s mobile products.
Once a product design idea is solidified through a brainstorming session, the design team sketches those ideas and models it through a Computer Aided Design process.
The design team doesn’t follow a linear creative process from idea to sketch, model and then to engineered demo, Stringer said. Developed concepts will be scrapped if a better idea comes along, he said.
“We are always doubting. We are always questioning.”
Stringer listed some of the manufacturing problems for the original iPhone, from putting glass in close proximity to hardened steel to cutting holes in the glass.
“People thought we were crazy,” he said.
Stringer's the dude with long hair and beard on the left.
If you have been hanging around that long then you might have noticed that it helps at least to indicate who you are responding to, if not actually quote the post.
Thanks for the tip. He put it to good use in another thread.
One form of design process is to attempt and empathize what aspires you, either through trying to understand their spirit, thought process or in this case creative company culture to break out of your own process. Hopefully ending up seeing some "aha!" moments.
Saying that 26% of parts in the first iPhone is Samsung parts doesn't equate to innovation on their part at all, or to show that Apple was lacking in innovation.
As history have shown, it is possible to use existing parts and be creative enough to invent something new.
I can't help but think that the culture of piracy so endemic in Asian cultures is at work here. I can just see the Samsung executives indignant at the thought that they're doing anything out of the ordinary...their ordinary that is. Perhaps the outcome of this trial will send a chill throughout groups that see nothing wrong with these practices and force them to only seek the benefits of their own endeavors.
And now we get into the racial prejudice that becomes so easy for the ignorant & uneducated.
If Apple can take Samsung to court over this then other tech companies should start suing each other too. Xerox, please stand up. And Palm (what's left of it) and LG and Sony... I'd like Apple to win so that it'll open the floodgates to more lawsuits. On your mark. Get set. Litigate.
Actually I think tht prototype is a sweet phone. If they could find a way to make that only thinner I'd be all over it.
It's basically the 2nd gen and 6th gen iPod nano design, but sideways. On the iPod nano, the flat parts are the top and bottom. And with the 2nd gen nano having been released in September 2006, you can bet that there's even priorer (priorlier?) art than that in the form of its prototypes.
Can someone explain why Samsung didn't meet the discovery deadline? Presumably they had all these documents. Why didn't they turn them over in time? Whining about it now and trying to get the public to believe the judge is biased is pathetic.
How old are you? That's not how it works. Disobeying a judge doesn't put the judge on the hot seat, it puts you in jail. It's more likely a desperate PR move because it is irrelevant to the case whether Apple copied Sony.
I don't see it so much as a PR move, but the only card they can play. We've all seen the evidence and exhibits, there might be a bit more we don't know about but mostly it's pretty clear that Samsung hasn't got a leg to stand on unless they can prove this one single point.
I think they leaked it for the same reason that the lawyer literally begged it to be included. It's the only really good card they have. Without this, they are sunk.
I wish we could get a clear answer to why the pictures of the prototype phones from Samsung that they claim predate the iPhone are being excluded. I have a good idea why and there are several logical choices as to why, but every time it's reported it seems to be mixed up with the issue of the "Sony" iPhone prototype (mostly because Samsung joins the two together in any statements they make), when the two things shouldn't really be related at all.
This just gives fuel to people like DaHarder (currently set on "ignore" for me, whew!), who rightly point out that the two issues have nothing to do with each other. The lack of clarity from all sides is infuriating and the third hand reporting by lame tech blogs just muddies things up even more.
The pictures may be excluded because they are predated by the "Purple" iPhone design in 2005, because they were never released as phones, because Samsung can't prove they were actually designed in 2006, or a whole bunch of other possibilities. It would be nice to get a clear statement on it.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunspot42
Well, it's even worse than that. By that point in the middle of the last decade, Apple already had iPhone designs which looked a lot like what would eventually become the iPhone 4 - the rounded corners, flat front and back, bezel size, home button, side switches, the works. It appears one of their designers then decided to conduct a thought-experiment, "What would this design look like in Sony drag (circa 1983)." So they added a few old skool Sony-styled buttons and switches to it, and that little Sony-esque knob.
None of which I might add ever made it into either the original iPhone, the iPhone 3G or the iPhone 4.
These are common design exercises - "How would Sony do it?" "How would Le Corbusier do it?" "How would Geiger do it?". The difference is Apple never released and never attempted to make money from this homage, whilst Samsung manufactured their Apple-copy and made money from it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Why don't you explain what Apple has done that's the equivalent of violating a direct order from a judge - not once, but twice?
I don't expect a direct answer to this, only more weasel words from DaHarder.
Samsung takes excluded evidence to the media, gets reprimanded
Shocking?
Not really. Business as usual at Samsung.
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/business/worldbusiness/20samsung.html
New Bribery Allegation Roils Samsung
SEOUL, South Korea, Nov. 19 — Samsung, which has vigorously denied bribery charges in a snowballing corruption scandal, sustained another blow to its image on Monday when a former legal adviser to President Roh Moo-hyun said the company had once offered him a cash bribe.
The former aide, Lee Yong-chul, who also served as a presidential monitor against corruption, said that the money — 5 million won ($5,445) — was delivered to him in January 2004 as a holiday gift from a Samsung Electronics executive, but that he immediately returned it.
Before sending it back, Mr. Lee said, he took pictures of the cash package, which were released to the news media on Monday.
“I was outraged by Samsung’s brazenness, by its attempt to bribe a presidential aide in charge of fighting corruption,” Mr. Lee said in a written statement released at a news conference by a civic organization. He did not attend the event.
James Chung, a spokesman for Samsung Electronics, said, “We are trying to find out the facts around these allegations.”
Samsung Electronics is the mainstay of the 59-subsidiary Samsung conglomerate and a world leader in computer chips, flat-panel television screens and cellphones.
Mr. Lee’s accusation appeared to support recent assertions by a former chief lawyer at Samsung, Kim Yong-chul, that the conglomerate had run a vast network that bribed officials, prosecutors, tax collectors, journalists and scholars on behalf of Samsung’s chairman, Lee Kun-hee.
Prosecutors are investigating Mr. Kim’s accusations, and political parties have introduced legislation that would establish an independent counsel.
Opposition political parties say an independent prosecutor is needed because Mr. Kim identified the president’s new chief prosecutor, Lim Chai-jin, as one of many prosecutors to have received bribes from Samsung. Mr. Lim denied the assertion.
President Roh’s office dismissed the call for an independent counsel as an election-year political maneuver. The South Korean presidential election is scheduled on Dec. 19.
As the scandal expanded, the chairman, Lee Kun-hee, was absent Monday from a ceremony commemorating the 20th anniversary of the death of his father, Lee Byung-chul, Samsung’s founder. Company officials cited a “serious cold and illness from fatigue.”
Lee Yong-chul, the former presidential aide, now a partner at a law firm in Seoul, issued his statement and pictures through the National Movement to Unveil Illegal Activities by Samsung and Its Chairman, an organization that was started by civic groups after Mr. Kim’s allegations were made public.
Calls to Mr. Lee’s office were not returned on Monday.
“This is proof that Samsung’s bribery has reached not only prosecutors but the very core of political power, the Blue House,” the group said at the news conference, referring to the South Korean presidential office. President Roh’s office called that assertion “pure speculation.”
Mr. Lee said the bribe he received in 2004 was delivered after an executive at Samsung Electronics asked him whether his company could send him a holiday gift. Mr. Lee said he accepted, thinking that it would be a simple gift.
He said that when he returned the money with a protest, the Samsung executive apologized. The executive said he had simply allowed his company to send the gift in his name and had not known it contained cash, Mr. Lee related.
The executive could not be reached for comment. Samsung said the man left the company in June 2004 and now lived in the United States.
Lee Yong-chul said he decided to go public after reading about the lawyer Kim Yong-chul’s whistle-blowing. He said he believed Mr. Kim’s assertion that Samsung had run a systematic bribery effort.
Samsung has denied Mr. Kim’s allegations as “groundless.” A couple of Samsung executives Mr. Kim accused of delivering bribes have sued him.
In his statement, Lee Yong-chul said the cash was delivered to him while prosecutors were investigating assertions that Samsung and other conglomerates had provided large amounts of illegal campaign funds to presidential candidates during the 2002 election, which Mr. Roh won.
Several campaign officials for Mr. Roh and his opponent, Lee Hoi-chang, as well as Samsung executives, were convicted of playing major roles in raising slush funds in that campaign.
More recent:
http://gizmodo.com/5524174/controversial-book-claims-samsung-is-basically-the-most-corrupt-company-in-asia http://www.fastcompany.com/1627411/former-samsung-prosecutors-expose-accuses-samsung-of-massive-corruption
Bribery, Massive Corruption at Samsung, Says Exposé by Former S. Korean Prosecutor
. . . In addition, a lawmaker said she had once been offered a golf bag full of cash from Samsung, and a former presidential aide said he had received and returned a cash gift from the company.
Lee Kun-hee, the chairman of Samsung, was convicted of hiding more than $42 million from tax collection, and received nothing more than a suspended sentence. The media decided not to mention the whistle-blowing book at all, despite it achieving remarkable sales for a non-fiction book in that country. (Not a single newspaper published a review, and the only discussion of the book mentioned its sales--but not its title or author. Yeah, you read that right. They left out the title.) Even worse, the media refused to print any op-eds or articles explaining, let alone backing, Kim Yong-chul's side, out of fear that Samsung would pull advertisements from their TV shows and newspapers.
http://news.techeye.net/business/south-korea-makes-example-of-samsung-corruption
South Korea makes example of Samsung corruption
Samsung has been publicly forced to get its act together to stamp out corruption, with the South Korean government choosing to make an example of it.
According to a top industry consultant familiar with the company, Samsung's legal "philanderings" are no secret. While other companies are also at it, the South Korean government is keeping them safe as it looks to drive revenue and reputation to the country.
The comments come as news of shadiness inside Samsung spreads, after an inspection found that elements of the company were involved in corruption.
The findings led to CEO Oh Chang-Suk stepping down and Lee Kun-Hee, chairman of the company, claiming there would be some managerial changes.
However, he would not specify what the investigation had uncovered - only saying that it included taking bribes and enjoying hospitality from suppliers. He said the "worst type" of abuse was pressure on junior staff to commit corrupt acts.
"Corruption and fraud" at Samsung Techwin came about accidentally, and was a result of a "complacent attitude during the past decade", he told reporters
This isn't the first time Samsung has been alleged to have its hands in the till. In 2007 the company's former executives accused it of bribing police and politicians to stop probes into its management, while in 2009 the chairman, along with nine other senior executives, were indicted on tax dodging charges.
According to our analyst, speaking under condition of anonymity, these are well known facts.
"Let's be honest, Samsung's philanderings are not a secret, the company has been at it for years," he said.
Then how would you explain the pictures of the phones that were made available to all that predate the original iPhone?
If a biased judge won't allow it they let it slip to the press to get a fair trial. This puts Judge Koh on the hot seat and all but guarantees a retrial if Samsung loses, they knew exactly what they were doing. That's why the GS3 is the hottest selling phone in the world.
It was a brilliant move by Samsung.
Part of that smack might be to let the jury be told what Samsung did and how it is contempt etc.which will leave a bad taste in the collective mouth and could hurt things for Samsung
Just how old are you? I've been viewing AppleInsider for years and you are by far the most juvenile, biased and sophomoric moderator I've ever read.
From the comments on an average day I feel like I'm reading the Cartoon Network and not a tech site.
If you have been hanging around that long then you might have noticed that it helps at least to indicate who you are responding to, if not actually quote the post.
I think it is more of a question: Do they really think they're above contempt of court?
"lost in translation"
Pretty certain that the jury will vote in Apple's favor... Question is how much...
How old are you? That's not how it works. Disobeying a judge doesn't put the judge on the hot seat, it puts you in jail. It's more likely a desperate PR move because it is irrelevant to the case whether Apple copied Sony.
Meet the 16 ‘crazy’ designers of Apple’s iPhone
San Jose, California: Apple Inc’s celebrated industrial design team is a group of around 16 “maniacal” individuals from all over the world who spend a lot of time brainstorming around a kitchen table.
The world’s most valuable technology corporation on Tuesday allowed a rare glimpse into a zealously guarded internal hardware design process that has produced some of the world’s most celebrated consumer electronics.
In a high-profile US patent infringement trial against Samsung Electronics Co Ltdthat began this week, it called 17-year Apple design veteran Christopher Stringer as its first witness.
Stringer looked every inch the designer with his shoulder-length hair, salt-and-pepper beard, wearing an off-white suit with a narrow black tie.
“Our role is to imagine products that don’t exist and guide them to life,” he told the jury.
Apple’s products — particularly the seminal iPhone — are held in high regard throughout the industry. The gadget that revolutionised the smartphone industry is prominently displayed in the avant-garde San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.
The company, which is accusing its South Korean arch-foe of stealing iPhone and iPad design and features, owes a debt to creative guru Jonathan Ive and his cadre of designers a s sembled from Britain, Australia, the United States, Japan, Germany over more than a decade.
Stringer said Apple’s group of 15 to 16 industrial designers — headed by the British-born and recently knighted Ive — work on all of the company’s products and dedicate time every week to discuss them, mostly at the kitchen table.
That’s where the group is “most comfortable,” he said.
Ive’s team leads works out of a large, open studio on Apple’s campus in Cupertino, California, with music blaring through a giant sound system and access strictly limited to a small portion of employees, according to a 2006 profile of Ive in Business Week.
BRAINSTORMING
Most of the team have worked side-by-side for 15 to 20 years, said Stringer, who has “hundreds” of design patents to his name.
“We have been together for an awfully long time,” Stringer said. “We are a pretty maniacal group of people. We obsess over details.”
Over the years, the team earned a reputation for blending the aesthetically appealing with the functional. Stringer worked on the original iPhone — internally codenamed M-68 — and almost all of Apple’s mobile products.
Once a product design idea is solidified through a brainstorming session, the design team sketches those ideas and models it through a Computer Aided Design process.
The design team doesn’t follow a linear creative process from idea to sketch, model and then to engineered demo, Stringer said. Developed concepts will be scrapped if a better idea comes along, he said.
“We are always doubting. We are always questioning.”
Stringer listed some of the manufacturing problems for the original iPhone, from putting glass in close proximity to hardened steel to cutting holes in the glass.
“People thought we were crazy,” he said.
Stringer's the dude with long hair and beard on the left.
Originally Posted by muppetry
If you have been hanging around that long then you might have noticed that it helps at least to indicate who you are responding to, if not actually quote the post.
Thanks for the tip. He put it to good use in another thread.
One form of design process is to attempt and empathize what aspires you, either through trying to understand their spirit, thought process or in this case creative company culture to break out of your own process. Hopefully ending up seeing some "aha!" moments.
Saying that 26% of parts in the first iPhone is Samsung parts doesn't equate to innovation on their part at all, or to show that Apple was lacking in innovation.
As history have shown, it is possible to use existing parts and be creative enough to invent something new.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Looks like Jony has been hitting the gym.
One of Apple's prototypes:
Sony mobile phone from 2009:
Actually I think tht prototype is a sweet phone. If they could find a way to make that only thinner I'd be all over it. -:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by notaphilic
I can't help but think that the culture of piracy so endemic in Asian cultures is at work here. I can just see the Samsung executives indignant at the thought that they're doing anything out of the ordinary...their ordinary that is. Perhaps the outcome of this trial will send a chill throughout groups that see nothing wrong with these practices and force them to only seek the benefits of their own endeavors.
And now we get into the racial prejudice that becomes so easy for the ignorant & uneducated.
This site is so predictable.
If Apple can take Samsung to court over this then other tech companies should start suing each other too. Xerox, please stand up. And Palm (what's left of it) and LG and Sony... I'd like Apple to win so that it'll open the floodgates to more lawsuits. On your mark. Get set. Litigate.
Originally Posted by Rogifan
One of Apple's prototypes:
Actually I think tht prototype is a sweet phone. If they could find a way to make that only thinner I'd be all over it.
It's basically the 2nd gen and 6th gen iPod nano design, but sideways. On the iPod nano, the flat parts are the top and bottom. And with the 2nd gen nano having been released in September 2006, you can bet that there's even priorer (priorlier?) art than that in the form of its prototypes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryA
How old are you? That's not how it works. Disobeying a judge doesn't put the judge on the hot seat, it puts you in jail. It's more likely a desperate PR move because it is irrelevant to the case whether Apple copied Sony.
I don't see it so much as a PR move, but the only card they can play. We've all seen the evidence and exhibits, there might be a bit more we don't know about but mostly it's pretty clear that Samsung hasn't got a leg to stand on unless they can prove this one single point.
I think they leaked it for the same reason that the lawyer literally begged it to be included. It's the only really good card they have. Without this, they are sunk.
I wish we could get a clear answer to why the pictures of the prototype phones from Samsung that they claim predate the iPhone are being excluded. I have a good idea why and there are several logical choices as to why, but every time it's reported it seems to be mixed up with the issue of the "Sony" iPhone prototype (mostly because Samsung joins the two together in any statements they make), when the two things shouldn't really be related at all.
This just gives fuel to people like DaHarder (currently set on "ignore" for me, whew!), who rightly point out that the two issues have nothing to do with each other. The lack of clarity from all sides is infuriating and the third hand reporting by lame tech blogs just muddies things up even more.
The pictures may be excluded because they are predated by the "Purple" iPhone design in 2005, because they were never released as phones, because Samsung can't prove they were actually designed in 2006, or a whole bunch of other possibilities. It would be nice to get a clear statement on it.