I'm just saying man... You come here and bash apple all the time... It's like you're one them. (The Dark Side)... It's Apple's invention... Samsung doesn't have the right to sell a product with something designed from them. Or for that matter market ads saying "the next big thing" if it's a crappy overpowered piece of crap plastic phone.
Or maybe if you have a phone with a faster cpu, better gpu, 4 times the amount of RAM, camera of equal or better quality, replaceable batteries on the go, NFC capability, picture in picture video, actual multi-tasking, the original notification center and banners, ability to access your file system, ability to use wireless keyboards AND mice, faster web browsing, ability to attach any type of file to an email, etc...I could go on and on.
You think maybe, just maybe, features like these might have something to do with Samsung's success over say the look of an icon or a rubber banding effect? Why are Nokia and RIM phones fowling their companies. Because they are slow, lack many features and more importantly, don't run Android or iOS. People choose not to buy phones like that.
Nope, because they are just incremental updates using newer technology, besides a HTC One X will do all those things.
I love coming in here and reading the comments these days. Most of you people have no lives. You come here every day to say how much you hate samsung when you could actually be doing something worth while with your lives. It is not like any of this is could be important to most of you...it is a stupid cell phone. Why do you care that a company might have mimicked the iPhone? Any of you guys losing money over the deal? I doubt it.
Let the people that actually built the thing worry about it.
...and I own a iPhone4 and a 2011 MBP, so I am not a troll.
Hey even people who love Android should hate Samsung for making TouchWiz the most popular distro by basically copying Apple.
Hardware design --> I disagree with Apple, but I can understand that some people agree with them. However, it seems to me that if Samsung can't make a Galaxy that looks "that much" like an iPad, obviously lots of cars have to be taken out of the streets right now, due to looking like other manufacturers' models. Just look, for example, at how many cars look like a Giulietta, or how many cars copied the Espace (even creating the concept of a monospace-car, for what is in Apple-talk "blatant copy and copyright theft"). So, yeah, I disagree, but I still understand that the argument that Samsung did what it did to fool consumers can be believed and may even be true.
Software design and rubber-banding-type-issues --> are you fucking joking. Really. Come OOOOOON. Did Samsung copy-paste code from Apple? (Objective-C code based on private APIs? I don't thiiiiink so)
So they replicated effects by reimplementing. They're in their perfectly good right, imho. Do you imagine a world where you would be able to patent the idea of a race game on a computer and extort money from anyone who wants to do a race game?
Example,'s not shocking enough to change your mind? Given DNA is software of a sorts, why don't I just patent the idea of sex for the purpose of reproduction. I'll make sure to only allow use of that patent under fair terms, which means I get to say who can reproduce... Bit far-fetched, but gets the point across, I guess.
I love coming in here and reading the comments these days. Most of you people have no lives. You come here every day to say how much you hate samsung when you could actually be doing something worth while with your lives. It is not like any of this is could be important to most of you...it is a stupid cell phone. Why do you care that a company might have mimicked the iPhone? Any of you guys losing money over the deal? I doubt it.
Let the people that actually built the thing worry about it.
...and I own a iPhone4 and a 2011 MBP, so I am not a troll.
Because many of the people at this site own AAPL stock and are then losing money you jerk. If you invested money in a company when it was about to die and then sweated every time it hit a local high the dropped again till it got to where it was now you would understand. I bought in at $18.57 only to see it drop but I believed in Apple and the vision so I stayed put and ~$620 a share is good but $750-$1000 would be a bit nicer so unless you are offering to make up the diff put a sock in it.
I'm just saying man... You come here and bash apple all the time... It's like you're one them. (The Dark Side)... It's Apple's invention... Samsung doesn't have the right to sell a product with something designed from them. Or for that matter market ads saying "the next big thing" if it's a crappy overpowered piece of crap plastic phone.
Uh. Well, Apple doesn't have the right to sell a product with something designed from, when you think about it, a computer. I mean, Babbage invented that. Oh, wait, he stole the idea from Ada Lovelace. But then again, Pascal made the first working prototype, so I guess they all stole the iPhone from his calculating machine! What a shame!
Stop being a troll, please. Whether Apple/Samsung is right is the Court's to say. Besides, as soon as you place the items "dark side" and "crappy piece of crap" in the same "balanced" sentence, you earn the right to sign in as a member of DED's army of devilish minions of Hell. You also get a badge, I'm told.
Because many of the people at this site own AAPL stock and are then losing money you jerk. If you invested money in a company when it was about to die and then sweated every time it hit a local high the dropped again till it got to where it was now you would understand. I bought in at $18.57 only to see it drop but I believed in Apple and the vision so I stayed put and ~$620 a share is good but $750-$1000 would be a bit nicer so unless you are offering to make up the diff put a sock in it.
Heh. All's said here.
Basically, you're willing to silence the democratic opposition to make more money for yourself. Not a very liberal economy, that.
Who cares if (which, obviously, is a big if) the other companies would have brought a good quality product with no copyright infrigement, hence reducing your stock price (and hence making you less rich)?
Who cares if that's actually the better ecnomy, and better for the people of America?
No, definitely, let's silence Apple's opponents, let's not let things like Justice get in the way of AAPL stock price rise.
Uh.
I will repeat it, apart from the software patenting issue where I think Apple's deeply wrong, just as Microsoft was deeply wrong, I think Samsung has illegally copied and should pay for it. I still find it annoying that AAPL owners will stand your kind of points.
"...companies like Microsoft, Nokia, and Blackberry..." these are companies FAILING to compete with the iPhone. That exactly shows why you have to copy the UI of the iPhone to compete, because if you don't copy, you end up being those companies.
Not to worry tho. Nokia has it figured out. Sell their standards-essential IP to companies like MOSAID who are tasked with aggressively enforcing them or risk Nokia taking them back to give to someone else to litigate. They even brought suit against Apple a few months ago using patents that Nokia apparently didn't license to Apple in the last go-round, tho neither AI nor FOSSPatents has mentioned it.
Continuing with that business line they've sent another 500 patent families over to Vringo, most of them also FRAND-pledged. Vringo? Those are ringtone guys so sounds harmless enough right? That's until you find that:
Vringo last month completed a merger with intellectual-property firm Innovate/Protect, a company that filed a patent suit against AOL, Google Inc. (GOOG), IAC/InterActiveCorp. (IACI), Gannett Co. (GCI) and Target Corp. (TGT) last year. The company acquired eight patents from Lycos and claims two of those patents were infringed.
And what has Vringo stated they'll use these Nokia patents for? Why litigation for royalty revenues of course!
"The new portfolio, which includes patent applications, will be used to start a new licensing and litigation campaign."
No doubt the next patent suits against Apple, Google, RIM and whoever else are already in planning. At least we have more lawsuits to look forward to. Wouldn't want things to get boring
It's pointless to say or show anything to these brain washed people. And Apple Insider used to be fairly good, but since Tallest Skil came in and basically ensured all the Apple fanbois jerked each other off in their blissfully ignorant Apple world, this site has gone to shit.
I have more Apple products in my household than probably 95% of the fools on here, and it isn't the products I am trashing (except the iPhone maybe), but Apple's blatant copying hypocrisy. The braindead idiots that can't form an original thought outside the distortion field are just a byproduct of that hypocrisy.
So you're leaving then? Good, I won't bother to ignore you then.
I for one am never going to buy anything from Samsung, which is my right. I will also do my utmost to trash Samsung's name and reputation ever chance I get in stores online and so on.
SAMSUNG-= SAME SONG,
lets starts a campaign to think up silly stupid same sounding derogatory names for "Samesong"
Please grow the **** up. Oh wait, lemme guess...another one of those less than subtle trolls like whatshisname trying to make apple fans look like jerks by posting dumbshit like this.
Please grow the **** up. Oh wait, lemme guess...another one of those less than subtle trolls like whatshisname trying to make apple fans look like jerks by posting dumbshit like this.
Nice try.
Except it works. There's too many posters here already that think name-calling puts Apple owners in a good light, somehow making them sound intelligent and witty.
Try an AI search for Scamdung or Samesung to see how often they pull out the junior-high card. Perhaps even as often as ANALyst, another AI fav.
The rubber banding patent is a red herring. Apple originally sued Nokia, RIM and Samsung over it, and Nokia and RIM settled out of court and paid for a license. Samsung refused to pay for a license, so they went to court, and they lost (different trial). They've already pushed an update replacing the bounce scroll with a "blue haze". It looks way uglier than the bounce scroll, but it performs the same function.
I have used three different implementations of momentum scrolling and rubber banding (they go hand-in-hand). I have an ipad, a galaxy sII, and I've implemented a web app with sencha touch (which emulates both features in javascript code).
My thoughts on the matter:
Apple's momentum scrolling and bounce overscroll implementation is impressive and not trivial to copy. Both sencha and samsung (prior to removing the feature) haven't gotten the "feel" right. Regardless of prior art, apple "got it right", and nobody else has to my knowledge.
I'm fundamentally opposed to software patents. Apple's rubber banding effect is innovative, but it should never have been patented. I think that if patents should exist (and the jury is out on that one due to lack of objective evidence) they should exist not to guarantee profit but to guarantee innovation. In the software world, innovation happens so quickly and at such a low cost that patentability simply doesn't factor into it. Patents in software only exist to protect fiefdoms and revenue streams, not to guarantee R&D.
From a wider perspective, I think the whole thing comes down to product and customer vision
Apple has a very specific vision of their customer and the product that customer should have. Apple products are beautiful, but they always come with strings attached (strings like itunes and icloud). We can all effortlessly list many of the typical criticisms of what the iphone doesn't do that other phones do. Now, if you don't want those things, fine. But if you do, apple forces you into their world and their concept, or they force you to a competitor.
Samsung has a different product vision: they want to be in all market segments and target all potential customers and all possible ways of using a phone. They sell touch phones with and without a keyboard (sliding or folding), they sell candy-bars and clamshells. They sell android, windows phone, and bada. Big screens, small screens, LCD and OLED, and on and on... If there's a group of customers somewhere, they have a product in their line-up to cater to them. The galaxy S series is their product aimed at the "people who want an iphone-like look&feel without apple's forced limitations" segment, but to them it's just one of many product segments.
Now, this is why I get annoyed at apple for taking this to the courts. Yes, samsung slavishly copied the iphone's look&feel, and yes, that wasn't a quality move. But. The iphone isn't the right phone for me, and samsung's success in the marketplace demonstrates I'm not alone. Apple had a choice, they could (A) look at why people prefer galaxy s phones and fix the flaws in the iphone, or (B) go to the courts and sue the pants off samsung. They chose (B). Good luck to them, bad luck to all of us potential iphone buyers.
The rubber banding patent is a red herring. Apple originally sued Nokia, RIM and Samsung over it, and Nokia and RIM settled out of court and paid for a license. Samsung refused to pay for a license, so they went to court, and they lost (different trial). They've already pushed an update replacing the bounce scroll with a "blue haze". It looks way uglier than the bounce scroll, but it performs the same function.
FWIW the "rubber-band" patent is currently viewed as likely invalid by the German courts where Apple is suing Samsung over the same patent claims. So much of the software patent claims are viewed differently depending on what county or continent you're on. Invalid there, perhaps valid here, and probably not valid elsewhere.
Comments
Again, I'd like to ask if your Korean-American MD boss REALLY approves of your behavior?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
It's why this forum has turned to shit and every thread devolves into muck.
All the current mods seem happy to let them do it, in the interests of a "diversity of opinion". Riiight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World
Or maybe if you have a phone with a faster cpu, better gpu, 4 times the amount of RAM, camera of equal or better quality, replaceable batteries on the go, NFC capability, picture in picture video, actual multi-tasking, the original notification center and banners, ability to access your file system, ability to use wireless keyboards AND mice, faster web browsing, ability to attach any type of file to an email, etc...I could go on and on.
You think maybe, just maybe, features like these might have something to do with Samsung's success over say the look of an icon or a rubber banding effect? Why are Nokia and RIM phones fowling their companies. Because they are slow, lack many features and more importantly, don't run Android or iOS. People choose not to buy phones like that.
Nope, because they are just incremental updates using newer technology, besides a HTC One X will do all those things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatthewGavin
I love coming in here and reading the comments these days. Most of you people have no lives. You come here every day to say how much you hate samsung when you could actually be doing something worth while with your lives. It is not like any of this is could be important to most of you...it is a stupid cell phone. Why do you care that a company might have mimicked the iPhone? Any of you guys losing money over the deal? I doubt it.
Let the people that actually built the thing worry about it.
...and I own a iPhone4 and a 2011 MBP, so I am not a troll.
Hey even people who love Android should hate Samsung for making TouchWiz the most popular distro by basically copying Apple.
Originally Posted by Strat09
I'm just saying man... You come here and bash apple all the time... It's like you're one them.
Yeah, it's like I don't hang on Apple's every decision like each one is more holy than the last or something…
Who'd'a thunk, particularly since I get accused of that all the frigging time.
Icons --> I understand Apple's point.
Hardware design --> I disagree with Apple, but I can understand that some people agree with them. However, it seems to me that if Samsung can't make a Galaxy that looks "that much" like an iPad, obviously lots of cars have to be taken out of the streets right now, due to looking like other manufacturers' models. Just look, for example, at how many cars look like a Giulietta, or how many cars copied the Espace (even creating the concept of a monospace-car, for what is in Apple-talk "blatant copy and copyright theft"). So, yeah, I disagree, but I still understand that the argument that Samsung did what it did to fool consumers can be believed and may even be true.
Software design and rubber-banding-type-issues --> are you fucking joking. Really. Come OOOOOON. Did Samsung copy-paste code from Apple? (Objective-C code based on private APIs? I don't thiiiiink so)
So they replicated effects by reimplementing. They're in their perfectly good right, imho. Do you imagine a world where you would be able to patent the idea of a race game on a computer and extort money from anyone who wants to do a race game?
Example,'s not shocking enough to change your mind? Given DNA is software of a sorts, why don't I just patent the idea of sex for the purpose of reproduction. I'll make sure to only allow use of that patent under fair terms, which means I get to say who can reproduce... Bit far-fetched, but gets the point across, I guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatthewGavin
I love coming in here and reading the comments these days. Most of you people have no lives. You come here every day to say how much you hate samsung when you could actually be doing something worth while with your lives. It is not like any of this is could be important to most of you...it is a stupid cell phone. Why do you care that a company might have mimicked the iPhone? Any of you guys losing money over the deal? I doubt it.
Let the people that actually built the thing worry about it.
...and I own a iPhone4 and a 2011 MBP, so I am not a troll.
Because many of the people at this site own AAPL stock and are then losing money you jerk. If you invested money in a company when it was about to die and then sweated every time it hit a local high the dropped again till it got to where it was now you would understand. I bought in at $18.57 only to see it drop but I believed in Apple and the vision so I stayed put and ~$620 a share is good but $750-$1000 would be a bit nicer so unless you are offering to make up the diff put a sock in it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strat09
I'm just saying man... You come here and bash apple all the time... It's like you're one them. (The Dark Side)... It's Apple's invention... Samsung doesn't have the right to sell a product with something designed from them. Or for that matter market ads saying "the next big thing" if it's a crappy overpowered piece of crap plastic phone.
Uh. Well, Apple doesn't have the right to sell a product with something designed from, when you think about it, a computer. I mean, Babbage invented that. Oh, wait, he stole the idea from Ada Lovelace. But then again, Pascal made the first working prototype, so I guess they all stole the iPhone from his calculating machine! What a shame!
Stop being a troll, please. Whether Apple/Samsung is right is the Court's to say. Besides, as soon as you place the items "dark side" and "crappy piece of crap" in the same "balanced" sentence, you earn the right to sign in as a member of DED's army of devilish minions of Hell. You also get a badge, I'm told.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot
Because many of the people at this site own AAPL stock and are then losing money you jerk. If you invested money in a company when it was about to die and then sweated every time it hit a local high the dropped again till it got to where it was now you would understand. I bought in at $18.57 only to see it drop but I believed in Apple and the vision so I stayed put and ~$620 a share is good but $750-$1000 would be a bit nicer so unless you are offering to make up the diff put a sock in it.
Heh. All's said here.
Basically, you're willing to silence the democratic opposition to make more money for yourself. Not a very liberal economy, that.
Who cares if (which, obviously, is a big if) the other companies would have brought a good quality product with no copyright infrigement, hence reducing your stock price (and hence making you less rich)?
Who cares if that's actually the better ecnomy, and better for the people of America?
No, definitely, let's silence Apple's opponents, let's not let things like Justice get in the way of AAPL stock price rise.
Uh.
I will repeat it, apart from the software patenting issue where I think Apple's deeply wrong, just as Microsoft was deeply wrong, I think Samsung has illegally copied and should pay for it. I still find it annoying that AAPL owners will stand your kind of points.
Or maybe I just misread you...
lets see
the Asian is a copy of the Caucasian
Trouble is they had to make some chnages so as not to get sued
Slitty eyes, smaller penis, 1 foot shorter, smaller breast on female, less creative, no artists
wtf does Samesong think:? they can make a better human?
Can't even makes decent copy of a Anglo-Saxon jeez
Quote:
Originally Posted by drobforever
You're kidding right?
"...companies like Microsoft, Nokia, and Blackberry..." these are companies FAILING to compete with the iPhone. That exactly shows why you have to copy the UI of the iPhone to compete, because if you don't copy, you end up being those companies.
Not to worry tho. Nokia has it figured out. Sell their standards-essential IP to companies like MOSAID who are tasked with aggressively enforcing them or risk Nokia taking them back to give to someone else to litigate. They even brought suit against Apple a few months ago using patents that Nokia apparently didn't license to Apple in the last go-round, tho neither AI nor FOSSPatents has mentioned it.
Continuing with that business line they've sent another 500 patent families over to Vringo, most of them also FRAND-pledged. Vringo? Those are ringtone guys so sounds harmless enough right? That's until you find that:
Vringo last month completed a merger with intellectual-property firm Innovate/Protect, a company that filed a patent suit against AOL, Google Inc. (GOOG), IAC/InterActiveCorp. (IACI), Gannett Co. (GCI) and Target Corp. (TGT) last year. The company acquired eight patents from Lycos and claims two of those patents were infringed.
And what has Vringo stated they'll use these Nokia patents for? Why litigation for royalty revenues of course!
"The new portfolio, which includes patent applications, will be used to start a new licensing and litigation campaign."
No doubt the next patent suits against Apple, Google, RIM and whoever else are already in planning. At least we have more lawsuits to look forward to. Wouldn't want things to get boring
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120809-711134.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World
It's pointless to say or show anything to these brain washed people. And Apple Insider used to be fairly good, but since Tallest Skil came in and basically ensured all the Apple fanbois jerked each other off in their blissfully ignorant Apple world, this site has gone to shit.
I have more Apple products in my household than probably 95% of the fools on here, and it isn't the products I am trashing (except the iPhone maybe), but Apple's blatant copying hypocrisy. The braindead idiots that can't form an original thought outside the distortion field are just a byproduct of that hypocrisy.
So you're leaving then? Good, I won't bother to ignore you then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul94544
I for one am never going to buy anything from Samsung, which is my right. I will also do my utmost to trash Samsung's name and reputation ever chance I get in stores online and so on.
SAMSUNG-= SAME SONG,
lets starts a campaign to think up silly stupid same sounding derogatory names for "Samesong"
Please grow the **** up. Oh wait, lemme guess...another one of those less than subtle trolls like whatshisname trying to make apple fans look like jerks by posting dumbshit like this.
Nice try.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Please grow the **** up. Oh wait, lemme guess...another one of those less than subtle trolls like whatshisname trying to make apple fans look like jerks by posting dumbshit like this.
Nice try.
Except it works. There's too many posters here already that think name-calling puts Apple owners in a good light, somehow making them sound intelligent and witty.
Try an AI search for Scamdung or Samesung to see how often they pull out the junior-high card. Perhaps even as often as ANALyst, another AI fav.
The rubber banding patent is a red herring. Apple originally sued Nokia, RIM and Samsung over it, and Nokia and RIM settled out of court and paid for a license. Samsung refused to pay for a license, so they went to court, and they lost (different trial). They've already pushed an update replacing the bounce scroll with a "blue haze". It looks way uglier than the bounce scroll, but it performs the same function.
See http://www.theverge.com/2011/12/3/2608407/apple-license-ios-scrolling-patent-nokia-ibm-offered-samsung
I have used three different implementations of momentum scrolling and rubber banding (they go hand-in-hand). I have an ipad, a galaxy sII, and I've implemented a web app with sencha touch (which emulates both features in javascript code).
My thoughts on the matter:
Apple's momentum scrolling and bounce overscroll implementation is impressive and not trivial to copy. Both sencha and samsung (prior to removing the feature) haven't gotten the "feel" right. Regardless of prior art, apple "got it right", and nobody else has to my knowledge.
I'm fundamentally opposed to software patents. Apple's rubber banding effect is innovative, but it should never have been patented. I think that if patents should exist (and the jury is out on that one due to lack of objective evidence) they should exist not to guarantee profit but to guarantee innovation. In the software world, innovation happens so quickly and at such a low cost that patentability simply doesn't factor into it. Patents in software only exist to protect fiefdoms and revenue streams, not to guarantee R&D.
From a wider perspective, I think the whole thing comes down to product and customer vision
Apple has a very specific vision of their customer and the product that customer should have. Apple products are beautiful, but they always come with strings attached (strings like itunes and icloud). We can all effortlessly list many of the typical criticisms of what the iphone doesn't do that other phones do. Now, if you don't want those things, fine. But if you do, apple forces you into their world and their concept, or they force you to a competitor.
Samsung has a different product vision: they want to be in all market segments and target all potential customers and all possible ways of using a phone. They sell touch phones with and without a keyboard (sliding or folding), they sell candy-bars and clamshells. They sell android, windows phone, and bada. Big screens, small screens, LCD and OLED, and on and on... If there's a group of customers somewhere, they have a product in their line-up to cater to them. The galaxy S series is their product aimed at the "people who want an iphone-like look&feel without apple's forced limitations" segment, but to them it's just one of many product segments.
Now, this is why I get annoyed at apple for taking this to the courts. Yes, samsung slavishly copied the iphone's look&feel, and yes, that wasn't a quality move. But. The iphone isn't the right phone for me, and samsung's success in the marketplace demonstrates I'm not alone. Apple had a choice, they could (A) look at why people prefer galaxy s phones and fix the flaws in the iphone, or (B) go to the courts and sue the pants off samsung. They chose (B). Good luck to them, bad luck to all of us potential iphone buyers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsebrech
The rubber banding patent is a red herring. Apple originally sued Nokia, RIM and Samsung over it, and Nokia and RIM settled out of court and paid for a license. Samsung refused to pay for a license, so they went to court, and they lost (different trial). They've already pushed an update replacing the bounce scroll with a "blue haze". It looks way uglier than the bounce scroll, but it performs the same function.
FWIW the "rubber-band" patent is currently viewed as likely invalid by the German courts where Apple is suing Samsung over the same patent claims. So much of the software patent claims are viewed differently depending on what county or continent you're on. Invalid there, perhaps valid here, and probably not valid elsewhere.