Samsung is quite clearly getting desperate. It doesn't matter what "inspired" your design, if you are infringing on someone else's patent then your inspiration is irrelevant. A single infringing design could easily have been inspired by a thousand different things, but the end result still infringes on Apple's patents. Inspiration has nothing to do with it. Samsung is losing this one.
Why? Because someone in the industry is standing up to infringers?
Patent system: ok.
Apple using it to defend their patents: patent system is broken.
????
NOTHING IS BROKEN HERE. The "patent system" is working just as it was intended. And the courts are doing the job they are there to do: adjudicate disputes. Exactly as intended.
The only thing broken is the industry outside of Cupertino. Take Apple out of the mix, and soon enough we'll find ourselves in the Dark Ages of mobile again, today's version of the industry pre-June 2007.
Am I saying there is a monumental lack of innovation outside of Apple? If there *is* any innovation outside of Apple, then something has gone terribly wrong: the also-rans don't know how to make their towering genius and stupendous ideas appeal to consumers. In this market, innovation unseen, wasted, and mishandled, is no innovation at all. In which case, there is no reason for me, or you, or anyone else to bother acknowledging it.
The Apple logo actually has something behind it. It actually delivers great things to consumers who end up wanting more of it. No one else can manage to pull that off without at the best of times, aping Apple (what we saw at CES, for example), and at the worst of times, copying them blatantly, right down to connectors and packaging (Samsung.)
The only thing broken is the industry outside of Cupertino. Take Apple out of the mix, and soon enough we'll find ourselves in the Dark Ages of mobile again, today's version of the industry pre-June 2007.
The only thing that has been made worse in the entire tech industry, going so far as to encompass all digital media entirely, in the last five years as a result of Apple is data plans are no longer unlimited.
Apple brought in a icon designer who only claimed that "should couldnt tell the difference" between icons.
Yet, they are going app sh!t when Samsung wanted to bring in the ACTUAL designer of the F700 phone, which was submitted for a design "patent" in December 2006.
This device is a significant smoking gun that undermines Apple's entire accusations that Samsung "slavishly copied" Apple.
Whats even funniers is that Apple, on purpose, left out the F700 for it would hurt their statement.
Apple brought in a icon designer who only claimed that "should couldnt tell the difference" between icons.
Yet, they are going app sh!t when Samsung wanted to bring in the ACTUAL designer of the F700 phone, which was submitted for a design "patent" in December 2006.
This device is a significant smoking gun that undermines Apple's entire accusations that Samsung "slavishly copied" Apple.
Whats even funniers is that Apple, on purpose, left out the F700 for it would hurt their statement.
Is there any doubt left that you have absolutely no argument whatsoever?
Is there any doubt left that you have absolutely no argument whatsoever?
I would say there is plenty of doubt.
Are there elements of the iPhone 3gs' design in the Galaxy S, yes, absolutely, unequivocally.
Is it designed from the ground up to be an absolute clone of the iPhone? I would say no, and that is what the F700 represents. It shows that they may have come a little too close to Apple's design, but its not as if that general shape and form was unprecedented for Samsung.
Samsung is definitely in the wrong here, but the F700 is certainly a strong piece of evidence on Samsung's side.
Apple brought in a icon designer who only claimed that "should couldnt tell the difference" between icons.
Yet, they are going app sh!t when Samsung wanted to bring in the ACTUAL designer of the F700 phone, which was submitted for a design "patent" in December 2006.
This device is a significant smoking gun that undermines Apple's entire accusations that Samsung "slavishly copied" Apple.
Whats even funniers is that Apple, on purpose, left out the F700 for it would hurt their statement.
If you gave a shit about truth, objectivity, honesty, etc you would aknowledge that the F700 absolutely bears no resemblance to the iPhone, either conceptually or in terms of design. But you clearly care little about those things.
How is that in any way, shape, or phone similar to an iPhone? It's black? They're worlds apart. It proves Samsung was NOT going in the same direction before the iPhone was revealed, and if anything strengthens Apple's case. Looks like Samsung's FUD worked on you, because you wanted it to.
If you gave a shit about truth, objectivity, honesty, etc you would aknowledge that the F700 absolutely bears no resemblance to the iPhone, either conceptually or in terms of design. But you clearly care little about those things.
How is that in any way, shape, or phone similar to an iPhone? It's black? They're worlds apart. It proves Samsung was NOT going in the same direction before the iPhone was revealed, and if anything strengthens Apple's case. Looks like Samsung's FUD worked on you, because you wanted it to.
... not sure if sarcastic or not.....
.... the front is dominated by the screen, faux metal outlines the edge, a single rounded button is the only physical thing that adorns the front, the front is dominated by the screen, and the ear piece grill is remarkably similar. It has its differences to be sure, but no one is saying its the SAME phone, just has enough similarities to show that the Galaxy S was a natural progression. Furthermore, finding one article of someone sharing your point of view doesn't constitute an objective analysis; especially when that person claims that because it came out a month after the original iPhone it means that its horrible proof for Samsung. From design to release, a phone's development takes far more time than a month, I question this article's author's credibility.
.... the front is dominated by the screen, faux metal outlines the edge, a single rounded button is the only physical thing that adorns the front, the front is dominated by the screen, and the ear piece grill is remarkably similar. It has its differences to be sure, but no one is saying its the SAME phone, just has enough similarities to show that the Galaxy S was a natural progression. Furthermore, finding one article of someone sharing your point of view doesn't constitute an objective analysis; especially when that person claims that because it came out a month after the original iPhone it means that its horrible proof for Samsung. From design to release, a phone's development takes far more time than a month, I question this article's author's credibility.
You make some very clever, totally believable, and not-in-any-way-silly, points.
And don't forget that the F700 was constructed from materials that were various colours, which the iPhone also was, not to mention both being made out of atoms.
You've really thrown some light on this whole issue for me...
I had an F700. Trust me - there's no chance of confusing it with an iPhone. Not in terms of hardware, and most definitely not in terms of software. Awful phone.
Actually, I think that the F700 does show some innovation, which is what Apple is asking for. Now, the innovation was in the wrong direction, as in the phone was ugly, but innovation none the less.
Uh oh, the half empty, half filled water. Hack psychologists use that.
I think that an engineer is going to use a bowl that is filled with water because water is cheap enough.
But I am still trying to figure out why they simply just say that from the back of the phone it looks very much like the back of an iPhone 1st gen, only a lot thicker.
One thing about Apple product designs that become big sellers is that they are usually iconic, just like the early Motorola handsets that first came out were iconic during the 70's. Boy did everyone that had one seem cool and important.
What I laugh about are the people that use cell phones to look like they are doing some important business deal, when in fact, all they are really doing is find out if they can hear someone through the bad cell connection.
The joke is "The optimist sees the glass half full. The pessimist sees the glass half empty. The engineer sees the glass designed and built twice as large as needed."
- or -
"Dear Optimist and Pessimist. While you were arguing over the glass, I drank the water. Signed, The Pragmatist."
A bowl of water? Can Samsung get any more desperate to show it's not copying & ripping off Apple designs?
What this case needs is Susan and Grover, a board with four things on it: a bowl of water, a Samsung 700, an iPhone and an iPhone3. Cue the music: "One of These Things Is Not Like The Other..."
If you gave a shit about truth, objectivity, honesty, etc you would aknowledge that the F700 absolutely bears no resemblance to the iPhone, either conceptually or in terms of design. But you clearly care little about those things.
How is that in any way, shape, or phone similar to an iPhone? It's black? They're worlds apart. It proves Samsung was NOT going in the same direction before the iPhone was revealed, and if anything strengthens Apple's case. Looks like Samsung's FUD worked on you, because you wanted it to.
Close the phone and you'll see a rectangle with rounded corners, centered screen and all the rest of the blah
Comments
I don't know how they can say with a straight face they didn't copy-cat.
Pause this at :40. Check out the background on the Galaxy. Is that phone running Snow Leopard or something? haha
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-57330279-501465/samsung-galaxy-s-ii-ad-mocks-apple-fans/
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcallows
she got her inspiration after hitting her head on a toilet bowl
Yeah, after a bit too much saki. lol
Samsung is quite clearly getting desperate. It doesn't matter what "inspired" your design, if you are infringing on someone else's patent then your inspiration is irrelevant. A single infringing design could easily have been inspired by a thousand different things, but the end result still infringes on Apple's patents. Inspiration has nothing to do with it. Samsung is losing this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvri
This system is broken since a long time now !
Why? Because someone in the industry is standing up to infringers?
Patent system: ok.
Apple using it to defend their patents: patent system is broken.
????
NOTHING IS BROKEN HERE. The "patent system" is working just as it was intended. And the courts are doing the job they are there to do: adjudicate disputes. Exactly as intended.
The only thing broken is the industry outside of Cupertino. Take Apple out of the mix, and soon enough we'll find ourselves in the Dark Ages of mobile again, today's version of the industry pre-June 2007.
Am I saying there is a monumental lack of innovation outside of Apple? If there *is* any innovation outside of Apple, then something has gone terribly wrong: the also-rans don't know how to make their towering genius and stupendous ideas appeal to consumers. In this market, innovation unseen, wasted, and mishandled, is no innovation at all. In which case, there is no reason for me, or you, or anyone else to bother acknowledging it.
The Apple logo actually has something behind it. It actually delivers great things to consumers who end up wanting more of it. No one else can manage to pull that off without at the best of times, aping Apple (what we saw at CES, for example), and at the worst of times, copying them blatantly, right down to connectors and packaging (Samsung.)
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
The only thing broken is the industry outside of Cupertino. Take Apple out of the mix, and soon enough we'll find ourselves in the Dark Ages of mobile again, today's version of the industry pre-June 2007.
The only thing that has been made worse in the entire tech industry, going so far as to encompass all digital media entirely, in the last five years as a result of Apple is data plans are no longer unlimited.
FAIL
Apple brought in a icon designer who only claimed that "should couldnt tell the difference" between icons.
Yet, they are going app sh!t when Samsung wanted to bring in the ACTUAL designer of the F700 phone, which was submitted for a design "patent" in December 2006.
This device is a significant smoking gun that undermines Apple's entire accusations that Samsung "slavishly copied" Apple.
Whats even funniers is that Apple, on purpose, left out the F700 for it would hurt their statement.
Originally Posted by Galbi
Apple brought in a icon designer who only claimed that "should couldnt tell the difference" between icons.
Yet, they are going app sh!t when Samsung wanted to bring in the ACTUAL designer of the F700 phone, which was submitted for a design "patent" in December 2006.
This device is a significant smoking gun that undermines Apple's entire accusations that Samsung "slavishly copied" Apple.
Whats even funniers is that Apple, on purpose, left out the F700 for it would hurt their statement.
Is there any doubt left that you have absolutely no argument whatsoever?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Is there any doubt left that you have absolutely no argument whatsoever?
I would say there is plenty of doubt.
Are there elements of the iPhone 3gs' design in the Galaxy S, yes, absolutely, unequivocally.
Is it designed from the ground up to be an absolute clone of the iPhone? I would say no, and that is what the F700 represents. It shows that they may have come a little too close to Apple's design, but its not as if that general shape and form was unprecedented for Samsung.
Samsung is definitely in the wrong here, but the F700 is certainly a strong piece of evidence on Samsung's side.
I "CAN" ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi
Apple brought in a icon designer who only claimed that "should couldnt tell the difference" between icons.
Yet, they are going app sh!t when Samsung wanted to bring in the ACTUAL designer of the F700 phone, which was submitted for a design "patent" in December 2006.
This device is a significant smoking gun that undermines Apple's entire accusations that Samsung "slavishly copied" Apple.
Whats even funniers is that Apple, on purpose, left out the F700 for it would hurt their statement.
If you gave a shit about truth, objectivity, honesty, etc you would aknowledge that the F700 absolutely bears no resemblance to the iPhone, either conceptually or in terms of design. But you clearly care little about those things.
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/08/02/heres-the-phone-samsung-insists-the-apple-jury-must-see/
How is that in any way, shape, or phone similar to an iPhone? It's black? They're worlds apart. It proves Samsung was NOT going in the same direction before the iPhone was revealed, and if anything strengthens Apple's case. Looks like Samsung's FUD worked on you, because you wanted it to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
If you gave a shit about truth, objectivity, honesty, etc you would aknowledge that the F700 absolutely bears no resemblance to the iPhone, either conceptually or in terms of design. But you clearly care little about those things.
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/08/02/heres-the-phone-samsung-insists-the-apple-jury-must-see/
How is that in any way, shape, or phone similar to an iPhone? It's black? They're worlds apart. It proves Samsung was NOT going in the same direction before the iPhone was revealed, and if anything strengthens Apple's case. Looks like Samsung's FUD worked on you, because you wanted it to.
... not sure if sarcastic or not.....
.... the front is dominated by the screen, faux metal outlines the edge, a single rounded button is the only physical thing that adorns the front, the front is dominated by the screen, and the ear piece grill is remarkably similar. It has its differences to be sure, but no one is saying its the SAME phone, just has enough similarities to show that the Galaxy S was a natural progression. Furthermore, finding one article of someone sharing your point of view doesn't constitute an objective analysis; especially when that person claims that because it came out a month after the original iPhone it means that its horrible proof for Samsung. From design to release, a phone's development takes far more time than a month, I question this article's author's credibility.
How could it have been anything but? Touch was new!
Samsung want to show this was the beginning of their design principals and inspired their touch phones.
You make some very clever, totally believable, and not-in-any-way-silly, points.
And don't forget that the F700 was constructed from materials that were various colours, which the iPhone also was, not to mention both being made out of atoms.
You've really thrown some light on this whole issue for me...
I had an F700. Trust me - there's no chance of confusing it with an iPhone. Not in terms of hardware, and most definitely not in terms of software. Awful phone.
Actually, I think that the F700 does show some innovation, which is what Apple is asking for. Now, the innovation was in the wrong direction, as in the phone was ugly, but innovation none the less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
Uh oh, the half empty, half filled water. Hack psychologists use that.
I think that an engineer is going to use a bowl that is filled with water because water is cheap enough.
But I am still trying to figure out why they simply just say that from the back of the phone it looks very much like the back of an iPhone 1st gen, only a lot thicker.
One thing about Apple product designs that become big sellers is that they are usually iconic, just like the early Motorola handsets that first came out were iconic during the 70's. Boy did everyone that had one seem cool and important.
What I laugh about are the people that use cell phones to look like they are doing some important business deal, when in fact, all they are really doing is find out if they can hear someone through the bad cell connection.
The joke is "The optimist sees the glass half full. The pessimist sees the glass half empty. The engineer sees the glass designed and built twice as large as needed."
- or -
"Dear Optimist and Pessimist. While you were arguing over the glass, I drank the water. Signed, The Pragmatist."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Amhran
A bowl of water? Can Samsung get any more desperate to show it's not copying & ripping off Apple designs?
What this case needs is Susan and Grover, a board with four things on it: a bowl of water, a Samsung 700, an iPhone and an iPhone3. Cue the music: "One of These Things Is Not Like The Other..."
Close the phone and you'll see a rectangle with rounded corners, centered screen and all the rest of the blah