I'm wondering..... how do both companies manage to acquire such sensitive documents?
I believe it was require by law. They can't legally delete or alter anything but they can legally give you so much data that the relevant stuff is harder to find.
I've read through that long scribe document and am just floored. All those details that Samsung dissected made me realize how incredible the Apple teams are in putting these devices together in hardware and software. To take that much effort in those tiny details that I would never have noticed. Like having the bookmark sign shaded out because the web page is blank. That alone is a tiny detail that I never noticed but I guess Samsung phone idiots are just eager to bookmark everything possible. That scribe article was both incredibly entertaining and educational. Thanks for displaying it. I never would have seen it anywhere else. I only use this site to get my apple fix since it is thorough with reporting as much of any news as possible for apple.
My hat's off to the site team. Keep up the coverage for the case. I'm tuned in everyday multiple times and will continue to do so regularly.
Shaded icons when function not available? I did this for more than 15 years! Hey, maybe I was the first one to do this. Can I claim 2,5BUSD now?
OK, one more I promise. Page 131 in regard to home screen icons... The directions for improvement are:
Insert effects of light for softer, more luxurious icon implementation Make the edge curve more smooth to erase hard feel Remove a feeling that iPhone's menu icons are copied by differentiating design
In other words, they COPIED the icons and then made them a little different hoping they wouldn't get caught! What's the difference between that and plagiarizing a school paper, but running it through a thesaurus and changing the font size so it's not identical? It's still <span style="font-family:Arial;line-height:normal;">plagiarism</span>
people!!!
No, it literaly says: we need to make better looking icons, and we don't want it be in a way that they look like the iPhone's. In fact, this is clearing Samsung.
I say forget the money. This case should be treated like Enron and all executives involved in the iClone campaign should face jail time. I didn't think that moving Choi from CEO to another position in the company did much as far as sending a message. The fines may cause downsizing and employees will suffer, but those directly responsible for making the decision to copy will not.
Either jailtime or the fines should come directly out of the executives' pockets. One Won salary for them for the rest of their lives, regardless of whichever companies they end up working for.
As a for instance of blatant copying. The document states this about the iPhone's World clock when compared to the S1 on page 54:
"i-Phone: Displays the second hand on the clock and information about Yesterday and Today"
"Directions for Improvement: Need to display the second hand on the clock and information about Today and Yesterday"
Umm... Yes, that's right... Samsung just said "copy this verbatim". The original S1 screen had a digital read out and was a TERRIBLE UI and they just told their designers to copy it.
I thought this example was rather funny as they totally missed the point. The visible second hand on the iPhone's clocks are a cool visual effect, but it has nothing to do with "being considerate towards users" or making the clocks less "difficult to recognize." The main difference here was that the Samsung clock displays were way too small and low-res, which is what made their clocks harder to see.
This emphasizes the point that Samsung was blindly copying everything from the iPhone even when they didn't understand the reasons why the iPhone design worked better.
No, it literaly says: we need to make better looking icons, and we don't want it be in a way that they look like the iPhone's. In fact, this is clearing Samsung.
Wow, we actually have someone still defending Samsung after the release of this document!
Sorry Apple shareholders, but I can not see any problem with this report. You do analyse your products with competition and improve on competition. This is what you call 'innovation' that Apple has been doing, isnt it?
There is absolutely nothing wrong with studying a competitor, that’s good business practice.
There is everything wrong with then writing a detailed series of steps to precisely emulate that competitor.
This is damning evidence.
Studying a competitor to learn from them: e.g. Jon Ive suggesting a team designer come up with a design "as if Sony had designed it", is a standard learning practice… I have a book in my design library called "Digital Dreams, The Works of the Sony Design Center"… I also have books from P.I.E. that are entire collections of great examples of graphic design. I draw inspiration and learnings from these… that's learning from those who went before… "compose a variation in the style of Bach"… Newton's "on the shoulders of giants" concepts in practice...
This document pretty clearly crosses a line. It is a point by point detailed study of what Apple is doing right. That's fine on its own. It also illustrates comparatively where their product is weaker, and why, which is also fine. It could ALSO contain suggestions how to improve and that would be totally acceptable. However, here's where the line crosses… they could suggest UNIQUE solutions, even sometimes similar solutions. But instead, over and over, they fall into a pattern of suggesting essentially, "how to make our UI be more like (or even "exactly like") theirs"...
That's copying. Pure and simple.
Samsung tried to make it look as if "do an experimental mockup in the style of Sony" is the same as this…
Is it possible they really don't understand the difference?
yet more direct evidence of Samesung coping the iPhone. Best outcome of this trial would be for Samesung to be banned from selling cell phones period since alls Samesung does is copy Apple.
No, it literaly says: we need to make better looking icons, and we don't want it be in a way that they look like the iPhone's. In fact, this is clearing Samsung.
It might have had the effect you believe - if Samsung had created better icons instead of simply copying Apple. You have to look at the document in context. After completing this document, Samsung made lots of changes - and most of them involved copying what Apple did. How does that clear Samsung?
Man, Android looked like a car wreck back then - the whole thing was a complete mess of inconsistent fonts, weird font sizes, clashing colours and seemingly random screen layouts. (I am led to believe it has improved a lot with ICS / Jellybean, but I've not really seen either in any depth to judge)
Reading through that doc shows why Apple products are of such high quality and so user friendly - Apple go out of their way with the little details that have no real actual purpose in and of themselves (and are probably not even consciously noticed 9 times out of 10) but that work wonders to make the user experience feel that much more polished and professional...
But instead, over and over, they fall into a pattern of suggesting essentially, "how to make our UI be more like (or even "exactly like") theirs"...
That's copying. Pure and simple.
Samsung tried to make it look as if "do an experimental mockup in the style of Sony" is the same as this…
Is it possible they really don't understand the difference?
Take that assumption 'Sammy is copying Apple' away for a moment and read again.
Of course, if you truly like some aspects of competition, then you would want yours be more like them. Does this translate to 'copy'?
BTW, this report analyses Galaxy S and iPhone and made suggestions after Sammy marketed Galaxy S obviously. Can you tell me any Sammy smartphone since Galaxy S that looks alike iPhone any more than Galaxy S? You can not prove that Sammy is copying Apple from this report.
Sorry Apple shareholders, but I can not see any problem with this report. You do analyse your products with competition and improve on competition. This is what you call 'innovation' that Apple has been doing, isnt it?
Seriously dude? This document shows time and time again where Samsung tried and failed. They didn't innovate at all. They effectively said "our's sucks and we need to fix this... so copy what Apple did". Not just once or twice, but over and over again. That said, all they'll likely be called on in the end is a few specifics, but this document clearly shows a deliberate effort to copy Apple's work. Notice that they weren't referencing anyone else's handsets as solutions to fix that god awful mess?
Apple spent years in R and D getting the building blocks right. Each screen of the samsung looks like it was designed by someone different -- and it probably was. It was clearly rushed out the door as quickly as possible as their response to the iPhone. If Samsung actually spent the years in R and D like they'd have us believe, they wouldn't have screwed the pooch so badly and been forced to copy Apple the way that they did.
What this document really illustrates is the difference between taking your time, carefully thinking things through, paying attention to the details, actually understanding what your doing and floundering because you haven't a clue. When you finally realize that you haven't a clue, you resort to point by point copying, because that is quickest way to fix things. They could innovate, but it was quicker and easier to just copy.
Comments
I'm wondering..... how do both companies manage to acquire such sensitive documents?
I believe it was require by law. They can't legally delete or alter anything but they can legally give you so much data that the relevant stuff is harder to find.
Shaded icons when function not available? I did this for more than 15 years! Hey, maybe I was the first one to do this. Can I claim 2,5BUSD now?
No, it literaly says: we need to make better looking icons, and we don't want it be in a way that they look like the iPhone's. In fact, this is clearing Samsung.
And we all think Apple does not compare iOS to android usings sheets and states
* We need to alter notifications and have them drop from the top bar
* We need to have camera button on the lock screen
yeah right, Apple developed those features with designers who had been locked in an isolation cell since 2004...
you mean to admit that samsung did copy apple? lol
SAMSUNG IS SO BUSTED!
KOREAN COPY JAPANESE CARS, GE REFRIGERATOR, AND NOW APPLE IDEVICES.
HAS ANYONE SEEN HOW SAMSUNG COPY APPLE RETAIL STORE? THEY EVEN HAVE APPLE APP STORE ICON ON THEIR POSTERS!
HOLY COW!
How embarassing for Samesung.
This goes way beyond anything I would have expected!
There is absolutely nothing wrong with studying a competitor, that’s good business practice.
There is everything wrong with then writing a detailed series of steps to precisely emulate that competitor.
This is damning evidence.
I say forget the money. This case should be treated like Enron and all executives involved in the iClone campaign should face jail time. I didn't think that moving Choi from CEO to another position in the company did much as far as sending a message. The fines may cause downsizing and employees will suffer, but those directly responsible for making the decision to copy will not.
Either jailtime or the fines should come directly out of the executives' pockets. One Won salary for them for the rest of their lives, regardless of whichever companies they end up working for.
Do the crime, do the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkichline
As a for instance of blatant copying. The document states this about the iPhone's World clock when compared to the S1 on page 54:
"i-Phone: Displays the second hand on the clock and information about Yesterday and Today"
"Directions for Improvement: Need to display the second hand on the clock and information about Today and Yesterday"
Umm... Yes, that's right... Samsung just said "copy this verbatim". The original S1 screen had a digital read out and was a TERRIBLE UI and they just told their designers to copy it.
I thought this example was rather funny as they totally missed the point. The visible second hand on the iPhone's clocks are a cool visual effect, but it has nothing to do with "being considerate towards users" or making the clocks less "difficult to recognize." The main difference here was that the Samsung clock displays were way too small and low-res, which is what made their clocks harder to see.
This emphasizes the point that Samsung was blindly copying everything from the iPhone even when they didn't understand the reasons why the iPhone design worked better.
#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; }
#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 Blitz1
No, it literaly says: we need to make better looking icons, and we don't want it be in a way that they look like the iPhone's. In fact, this is clearing Samsung.
Wow, we actually have someone still defending Samsung after the release of this document!
You, sir, are the ultimate troll and shill!
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }Sorry Apple shareholders, but I can not see any problem with this report. You do analyse your products with competition and improve on competition. This is what you call 'innovation' that Apple has been doing, isnt it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
There is absolutely nothing wrong with studying a competitor, that’s good business practice.
There is everything wrong with then writing a detailed series of steps to precisely emulate that competitor.
This is damning evidence.
Studying a competitor to learn from them: e.g. Jon Ive suggesting a team designer come up with a design "as if Sony had designed it", is a standard learning practice… I have a book in my design library called "Digital Dreams, The Works of the Sony Design Center"… I also have books from P.I.E. that are entire collections of great examples of graphic design. I draw inspiration and learnings from these… that's learning from those who went before… "compose a variation in the style of Bach"… Newton's "on the shoulders of giants" concepts in practice...
This document pretty clearly crosses a line. It is a point by point detailed study of what Apple is doing right. That's fine on its own. It also illustrates comparatively where their product is weaker, and why, which is also fine. It could ALSO contain suggestions how to improve and that would be totally acceptable. However, here's where the line crosses… they could suggest UNIQUE solutions, even sometimes similar solutions. But instead, over and over, they fall into a pattern of suggesting essentially, "how to make our UI be more like (or even "exactly like") theirs"...
That's copying. Pure and simple.
Samsung tried to make it look as if "do an experimental mockup in the style of Sony" is the same as this…
Is it possible they really don't understand the difference?
yet more direct evidence of Samesung coping the iPhone. Best outcome of this trial would be for Samesung to be banned from selling cell phones period since alls Samesung does is copy Apple.
It might have had the effect you believe - if Samsung had created better icons instead of simply copying Apple. You have to look at the document in context. After completing this document, Samsung made lots of changes - and most of them involved copying what Apple did. How does that clear Samsung?
Originally Posted by jragosta
How does that clear Samsung?
Because even when they're found guilty, the trolls will say they're innocent and that Apple just wants a monopoly.
Man, Android looked like a car wreck back then - the whole thing was a complete mess of inconsistent fonts, weird font sizes, clashing colours and seemingly random screen layouts. (I am led to believe it has improved a lot with ICS / Jellybean, but I've not really seen either in any depth to judge)
Reading through that doc shows why Apple products are of such high quality and so user friendly - Apple go out of their way with the little details that have no real actual purpose in and of themselves (and are probably not even consciously noticed 9 times out of 10) but that work wonders to make the user experience feel that much more polished and professional...
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
But instead, over and over, they fall into a pattern of suggesting essentially, "how to make our UI be more like (or even "exactly like") theirs"...
That's copying. Pure and simple.
Samsung tried to make it look as if "do an experimental mockup in the style of Sony" is the same as this…
Is it possible they really don't understand the difference?
Take that assumption 'Sammy is copying Apple' away for a moment and read again.
Of course, if you truly like some aspects of competition, then you would want yours be more like them. Does this translate to 'copy'?
BTW, this report analyses Galaxy S and iPhone and made suggestions after Sammy marketed Galaxy S obviously. Can you tell me any Sammy smartphone since Galaxy S that looks alike iPhone any more than Galaxy S? You can not prove that Sammy is copying Apple from this report.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb
Sorry Apple shareholders, but I can not see any problem with this report. You do analyse your products with competition and improve on competition. This is what you call 'innovation' that Apple has been doing, isnt it?
Seriously dude? This document shows time and time again where Samsung tried and failed. They didn't innovate at all. They effectively said "our's sucks and we need to fix this... so copy what Apple did". Not just once or twice, but over and over again. That said, all they'll likely be called on in the end is a few specifics, but this document clearly shows a deliberate effort to copy Apple's work. Notice that they weren't referencing anyone else's handsets as solutions to fix that god awful mess?
Apple spent years in R and D getting the building blocks right. Each screen of the samsung looks like it was designed by someone different -- and it probably was. It was clearly rushed out the door as quickly as possible as their response to the iPhone. If Samsung actually spent the years in R and D like they'd have us believe, they wouldn't have screwed the pooch so badly and been forced to copy Apple the way that they did.
What this document really illustrates is the difference between taking your time, carefully thinking things through, paying attention to the details, actually understanding what your doing and floundering because you haven't a clue. When you finally realize that you haven't a clue, you resort to point by point copying, because that is quickest way to fix things. They could innovate, but it was quicker and easier to just copy.
Heaven and earth, indeed.