Apple, Samsung present closing arguments in California patent trial

24567

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 139

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by logandigges View Post


    If they lose, at least there will still be vodka....


     


    And Samsung says Apple only owes them something like 500 mil, which isn't that substantial to Apple.



     


    Apple owes me something like 500 ml -- of vodka -- if they lose!

  • Reply 22 of 139


    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

    Apple owes me something like 500 ml -- of vodka -- if they lose!




    Celebratory/conciliatory vodka, french fries, elevator shots… 


     


    Our community's memes are the only ones of which I approve. image


     


    Next week we'll hear that an inebriated Tim Cook fired an employee during an elevator ride when he refused to give Tim some of his fries… 

  • Reply 23 of 139

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by 845032 View Post


    Apple : Nothing is original



     


    Good. Then you won't mind going back to this:


     



     


    It's what you wanted, isn't it? A world without Apple.

  • Reply 24 of 139


    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


    It's what you wanted, isn't it? A world without Apple.



     


    And since you've brought it up, I think it's time to bring this back to attention… 






    Originally posted by It's A Wonderful OS


    Jimmy Stewart stars as Steve "Jobs" Bailey, who runs a beleaguered but beloved small-town computer company. For years, big monopolist Bill "Gates" Potter has been wielding his power and money to gain control of the town. And for years, Steve has fought for survival: "This town needs my measly, one-horse computer, if only to have something for people to use instead of Windows!"



    But now an angry mob is banging on Apple's front door, panicking.



    "The press says your company is doomed!" yells one man.

    "You killed the clones! We're going to Windows!" calls another.

    "We want out of our investment!" they shout.



    Steve, a master showman, calms them. "Don't do it! If Potter gets complete control of the desktop, you'll be forced to buy his bloatware and pay for his cruddy upgrades forever! We can get through this, but we've got to have faith and stick together!" The crowd decides to give him one more chance.



    But the day before Christmas, something terrible happens: On his way to the bank, the company's financial man, Uncle Gilly, somehow manages to lose $1.7 billion. With eyes flashing, Steve grabs the befuddled Gilly by the lapels. "Where's that money, you stupid old fool? Don't you realize what this means? It means bankruptcy and scandal! Get out of my company --and don't come back!"



    Desperate and afraid, Steve heads to Martini's, a local Internet cafe, and drowns his sorrows in an iced cappuccino. Surfing the Web at one of the cafe's Macs, all he finds online is second-guessing, sniping by critics, and terrible market-share numbers. As a blizzard rages, Steve drives his car crazily toward the river.



    "Oh, what's the use?!" he exclaims. "We've lost the war. Windows rules the world. After everything I've worked for, the Mac is going to be obliterated! Think of all the passion and effort these last 15 years -- wasted! Think of the billions of dollars, hundreds of companies, millions of people...." He stands on the bridge, staring at the freezing, roiling river below -- and finally hurls himself over the railing.



    After a moment of floundering in the chilly water, however, he's pulled to safety by a bulbous-nosed oddball.



    "Who are you?!" Steve splutters angrily.



    "Name's Clarence -- I mean Claris," says the guy. "I'm your guardian angel. I've been sent down to help you -- it's my last chance to earn my wings."



    "Nobody can help me," says Steve bitterly. "If I hadn't created the Mac, everybody'd be a lot happier: Mr. Potter, the media, even our customers. Hell, we'd all be better off if the Mac had never been invented at all!" Music swirls. The wind howls. The tattoo on Steve's right buttock --Buzz Lightyear from Toy Story -- vanishes. Steve pats the empty pocket where he usually carries his Newton. "What gives?"



    "You've got your wish," says Claris. "You never invented the Mac. It never existed. You haven't a care in the world."



    "Look, little fella, go off and haunt somebody else," Steve mutters.



    He heads over to Martini's Internet cafe for a good stiff drink. But he's shocked at the difference inside. "My God, look at the people using these computers! Both of them -- they look like math professors!"



    "They are," says Claris.



    "What is this, a museum? It looks like those computers are running DOS!"



    "Good eye!" says Claris. "DOS version 25.01, in fact -- the very latest."



    "I don't get it," Steve says.



    "DOS is a lot better and faster these days, but it hasn't occurred to anybody to market a computer with icons and menus yet. There's no such thing as Windows -- after all, there never was a Mac interface for Microsoft to copy."



    "But this equipment is ancient!" Steve exclaims. "No sound, no CD-ROM drive, not even 3.5-inch floppies!"



    "Those aren't antiques!" Claris says. "They're state-of-the-art TRS-80s, complete with the latest 12X, 5-inch-floppy drives. Don't forget, Steve: The Mac introduced and standardized all that good stuff you named."



    "But that's nuts!" Steve explodes. "You mean to tell me that the 46 percent of American households with computers are all using DOS?"



    "Correction: All 9 percent of American households," says Claris cheerfully. "Without a graphic interface, computers are still too complicated to be popular."



    "Bartender!" shouts Steve. "You don't have a copy of Wired here, do you? I've got to read up on this crazy reality!" The bartender glares. "I don't know what you're wired on, pal, but either stop talking crazy or get outta my shop."



    "No such thing as Wired," whispers Claris. "Never was. Before you wished the Mac away, most magazines were produced entirely on the Mac. Besides, Wired would be awfully thin without the Web."



    "Without the -- now, wait just a minute!"



    Horrified, Steve rushes over to one of the PCs and connects to the Internet. "You call this the Net? It looks like a text-only BBS -- and there's practically nobody online! Where's Navigator? Where's Internet Explorer? Where's the Web, for Pete's sake?"



    "Oh, I see," Claris smiles sympathetically. "You must be referring to all those technologies that spun off from the concept of a graphic interface. Look, Steve. Until the Mac made the mouse standard, there was no such thing as point and click. And without clicking, there could be no Web... and no Web companies. Believe it or not, Marc Andreesen works in a Burger King in Cincinnati."



    Steve scoffs. "Well, look, if you apply that logic, then PageMaker wouldn't exist either. Photoshop, Illustrator, FreeHand, America Online, digital movies -- all that stuff began life on the Mac."



    "You're getting it," Claris says. He holds up a copy of Time magazine. "Check out the cover price."



    Steve gasps. "Eight bucks? They've got a lot of nerve!"



    "Labor costs. They're still pasting type onto master pages with hotwax."



    "You're crazy!" screams Steve. "I'm going back to my office at Apple!"



    He drives like a madman back to Cupertino--but the sign that greets him there doesn't say, "Welcome to Apple." It says, "Welcome to Microsoft South."



    "Sorry, Steve; Apple went out of business in 1985," says Claris. "You see, you really did have a wonderful machine! See what a mistake it was to wish it away?"



    Steve is sobbing, barely listening. "OK, then -- I'll go to my office at Pixar!"



    "You don't have an office at Pixar," Claris reminds him. "There was no Mac to make you rich enough to buy Pixar!"



    Steve has had enough. He rushes desperately back to the icy bridge over the river. "Please, God, bring it back! Bring it back! I don't care about market share! Please! I want the Mac to live again!"



    Music, wind, heavenly voices -- and then snow begins softly falling. "Hey, Steve! You all right?" calls out Steve's friend Larry from apassing helicopter. Steve pats his pocket -- the Newton is there again! It's all back!



    Steve runs through the town, delirious with joy. "Merry Christmas, Wired! Merry Christmas, Internet! Merry Christmas, wonderful old Microsoft!" And now his office is filled with smiling people whose lives the Mac has touched. There's old Mr. Chiat/Day the adman. There's Yanni the musician. And there's Mr. Spielberg the moviemaker. As the Apple board starts singing "Auld Lang Syne," somebody boots up a Power Mac.



    Steve smiles at the startup sound. "You know what they say," he tells the crowd. "Every time you hear a startup chime, an angel just got his wings."



     


    You can tell when this was written… and it's just as true now as it was then.

  • Reply 25 of 139


    Here is my prediction:


     


    Any phone that did not have a Samsung logo on it will be found to be infringing.  Here is my reason, although some of Apple's ideas were not original by themselves, all the design elements put together made Apple's iPhone unique.


     


    It was also very clear that Samsung was copying every market leader from Palm Treo to BlackBerry.  Yes, Samsung made many different types of phones, but Samsung made "More" of iPhone looking phones after they realize the iPhone was a huge success.


     


    From my research, if a design has a function, it cannot be a trade dress.  For example, the size of the screen cannot be a trade dress.  Or the location of the home button

  • Reply 26 of 139
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by 845032 View Post


    I think you guys know this things before you accusing samsung....


     


    1. Samsung alrady developed that design before iphone


     



     


     



     



     



     



     


     


    http://www.slashgear.com/samsung-infuriates-apple-with-iphone-evidence-leak-01241146/


     


    2. That design is not Apple's own


     



    http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/29/apple-iphone-vs-lg-prada-separated-at-birth-part-2/

    http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/11/iphone-and-lg-ke850-separated-at-birth/



     




    LG Mobile Handset R&D Centre, Woo-Young Kwak, publicly announced the following statement:




    "We consider that Apple copied the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006."

    We take that to mean "Apple stole our idea."

    http://www.applematters.com/article/the-iphone-lawsuits/


     


     


    3. Filder Tablet (Prior-Art of ipad)


    Here is the tablet that apple copied its design.


     



     


     


     


    4. Jeff Han's Multi Touch Before Apple filed its patent





     


    Apple : Nothing is original



     


     


    You have several problems with your arguments. I am too lazy to address them all. First, however, Jeff Hand was beat by Fingerworks, which was started in 1998 based on research by Professor Wesserman. It was acquired by Apple in 2005. Fingerworks held several multi-touch patents, that became the property of Apple. See this link. You will also notice Han has not sued Apple. Second, the Fidler Tablet was never built. Apple's witness actual built one to disprove Samsung's prior art argument. 


     


    Third, the LG Prada phone and iPhone were announced at about the same time, yet LG used a GUI layered over FLASH. It was worked horribly, and probably only took a few months if that to work out. By comparison, Apple has shown that it actually was working on the GUI that was used on the phone way before the phone was released. Apple actually worked on the iPad first. More importantly, LG never sued Apple even though it hinted it would. There is a reason for that.


     


    In terms of Samsung having designs similar to the iPhone in the works before the iPhone in my mind is meaningless. First, Samsung destroyed tons of evidence, and has a history of doing so. Second, being that Samsung supplied Apple many of the parts Apple used, Samsung, likely had inside knowledge of what the iPhone was going to look like well before it was released. 

  • Reply 27 of 139

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    And since you've brought it up, I think it's time to bring this back to attention… 


     


    You can tell when this was written… and it's just as true now as it was then.



    I really liked reading that.  It was great.


     


    Good luck apple.  Like the other poster said it......


     


    Copying is copying.  iPhone may have some other ideas in it but it was a collaboration of greatness.  Samsung is a collaboration of iPhone and that's it.  It's pathetic.  Even copying the packaging!?!  Holy crap.  That's a nail in the coffin if you ask me.


     


    I bought an electronic cigarette from blucigs.com, and the packaging that it came it was EXACTLY like unpacking my iphone.  EXACTLY!!!!  It's crazy how EVERYONE copies Apple.

  • Reply 28 of 139
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,701member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by 845032 View Post


    I think you guys know this things before you accusing samsung....

     


    <insert whining, b!tching, kicking, screaming, and all Scamsung-paid shilling here>



     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


     


     


    You have several problems with your arguments. I am too lazy to address them all. First, however, Jeff Hand was beat by Fingerworks, which was started in 1998 based on research by Professor Wesserman. It was acquired by Apple in 2005. Fingerworks held several multi-touch patents, that became the property of Apple. See this link. You will also notice Han has not sued Apple. Second, the Fidler Tablet was never built. Apple's witness actual built one to disprove Samsung's prior art argument. 


     


    Third, the LG Prada phone and iPhone were announced at about the same time, yet LG used a GUI layered over FLASH. It was worked horribly, and probably only took a few months if that to work out. By comparison, Apple has shown that it actually was working on the GUI that was used on the phone way before the phone was released. Apple actually worked on the iPad first. More importantly, LG never sued Apple even though it hinted it would. There is a reason for that.


     


    In terms of Samsung having designs similar to the iPhone in the works before the iPhone in my mind is meaningless. First, Samsung destroyed tons of evidence, and has a history of doing so. Second, being that Samsung supplied Apple many of the parts Apple used, Samsung, likely had inside knowledge of what the iPhone was going to look like well before it was released. 



     


    It's unfortunate that your time was wasted in responding to 854032's shill rant.  He's a drive-by troll that not only does not deserve a response, but he will not acknowledge nor man-up to his actions.

  • Reply 29 of 139


    My question is: How can a jury of 10 people that are not Patent knowledge savvy grasp all the theatrics, BS, and facts presented in this trial. And to top it off an unusual 84 pages of instructions.


     


    The outcome should be interesting and surprising.

  • Reply 30 of 139


    Originally Posted by djkikrome View Post


    I bought an electronic cigarette from blucigs.com, and the packaging that it came it was EXACTLY like unpacking my iphone.  EXACTLY!!!!  It's crazy how EVERYONE copies Apple.



     


    Myriad Pro Semibold on the box? Plastic indented holder with a circular hole in the middle (you can tell I only own a first-gen iPhone)? Set of two small-size BluCigs logo stickers (with middle-size ones for multiple unit boxes and large-size ones for their electronic cigars)? image

  • Reply 31 of 139
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,179member


    If anyone wants to be entertained, read this Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 review from an Android fansite. This is what Samsung is shitting out with the iPad as a template. Amazing. 


    How anyone can root for and support this company, pretending it represents quality and innovation, is beyond me. 


     


    http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/08/21/samsung-galaxy-note-10-1-review-an-embarrassing-lazy-arrogant-money-grab/


     


    Quote:


    On paper, it all sounds very good. Reality, however, is an entirely different story. It's not enough to just have a good idea, you have to actually make it real, you need to build it.


    I'm sad to report that Samsung failed at execution on all fronts. Samsung has been pushing the skinning envelope further and further, and, with this revision of TouchWiz, they've slammed into a brick wall. Couple this failure with astonishingly bad hardware and a $500 price tag, and you've got yourself a real disappointment. Samsung promised us the moon, and then cut corners everywhere possible, and it's hard to walk away not feeling a little insulted.




     


    Quote:



    • The build quality. Terrible even by Samsung's low standards. The back is actually squishy, and you can feel it deform while holding it. It's noisy too, the plastic creaks, groans, and grinds when you pick it up. Regular, strong plastic would still be unacceptable when everyone else uses aluminum, but this... this is insulting for a $500 tablet.


    • An ugly two-tone "please don't ever confuse this with an iPad" design. It's not designed to look good, it's only designed to not look like an iPad.


    • A 1280x800 resolution display on a flagship device is not ok. Asus does 1920x1080, and Samsung makes a 9.7 inch, 2048x1536 display for Apple. They seriously cheaped out here.


    • The pen feels cheap too. It's a hollow plastic tube. It's got a button that doesn't do anything useful, and you can't customize it.


    • No NFC on a device that is, by definition, a secondary device. Have aGalaxy S III and a Note 10.1? Well, guess what? You can't tap to share because Samsung cheaped out. 2 months ago, NFC was all the rage at Samsung HQ. Now, all of a sudden, it's not important enough to include in your flagship tablet. What happened?


    • The new multitasking features, floating apps and split screen, just aren't any good. Compatibility is limited to a handful of not-very-useful TouchWiz apps, and split screen has terrible lag when switching between the two open apps.




     


     


    Quote:


    This is a Samsung device, so you just know things in this department are going to be bad, but I never expected they would be this bad. Sure, there's the usual, tame stuff. You get, for instance, the same nasty looking corner construction I complained about in my Galaxy S III review. But this time, Samsung went all out and invented a new, even more horrible form of plastic.


    The Note 10.1 is wrapped in the trashiest, most awful, cheapest-feeling plastic I've ever experienced. Sure, the finish is Samsung's usual glossy-plastic junk, but this plastic isn't even rigid. It's squishy.


    Yeah, you heard me, squishy plastic. You can easily flex it with a light touch, and you can feel the whole back deform in your hands when using it. It's sort of like holding a marshmallow. Don't believe me? Watch this:




     


    You need to watch the video of him pushing down on the back plastic. Its unreal. These are the products that Apple haters root for simply because they compete against Apple's products. Is this the type of product brought to market from a company that gives a ****? This shit is the same price as the iPad, yet haters call the iPad 'overpriced' a product with screen quality, build quality, and performance that completely decimates this piece of shit. 

  • Reply 32 of 139
    jakebjakeb Posts: 557member


    Can this type of case be appealed? What are the chances of this being over when this trial is through?

  • Reply 33 of 139
    Good one !!
    Nice reply
  • Reply 34 of 139
    galbigalbi Posts: 968member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


     


    Good. Then you won't mind going back to this:


     



     


    It's what you wanted, isn't it? A world without Apple.



     


    His argument is about the phones physical design.


     


    YOUR argument is about the OS design.


     


    TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS.


     


    Stick with the program wise guy.


     


    Dont try to play at words.

  • Reply 35 of 139
    galbigalbi Posts: 968member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TBell View Post




     


    In terms of Samsung having designs similar to the iPhone in the works before the iPhone in my mind is meaningless. First, Samsung destroyed tons of evidence, and has a history of doing so. Second, being that Samsung supplied Apple many of the parts Apple used, Samsung, likely had inside knowledge of what the iPhone was going to look like well before it was released. 



     


    Those statements are pure speculations on your part. You have no evidence.


     


    Apple has also destroyed email evidence. So both parties are at fault.

  • Reply 36 of 139
    galbigalbi Posts: 968member


    Samsung is going to win this one.

  • Reply 37 of 139
    misamisa Posts: 827member
    souliisoul wrote: »
    They also stole the Apple Store look as well for their Samsung store.
    tbell wrote: »
    Third, the LG Prada phone and iPhone were announced at about the same time, yet LG used a GUI layered over FLASH. It was worked horribly, and probably only took a few months if that to work out. By comparison, Apple has shown that it actually was working on the GUI that was used on the phone way before the phone was released. Apple actually worked on the iPad first. More importantly, LG never sued Apple even though it hinted it would. There is a reason for that.

    The interesting thing to point out is that the iPhone UI, in the SDK uses the MacOS X API, because iOS is MacOS X. This saves Apple from having to write two different operating systems (See where Microsoft dropped the ball with WindowsCE) or having different hardware platforms to compile against (You have one x86 target and one ARM target, or in theory a Universal Binary.) But the tradeoff is that the "iPhone emulator" is nothing more than the iPhone's UI running on full fledged MacOS X. So you can have a really overpowered mac that you develop your software on, and the actual device doesn't run it anywhere near as good. So Samsung trying to claim that Apple didn't invent any of the UI stuff is just silly. I would be willing to bet that the earliest iPad/iPhone prototypes were running the full OS X before someone said 'this isn't a very good experience clicking on these tiny UI elements, Lets throw away finder and try something else"
  • Reply 38 of 139
    I always think that the Prada phone is a funny case bc it it was announced in December 2006, knowing that Macworld was in January 2007, with many months or years speculating an iPhone announcement., even more closer to the date.
  • Reply 39 of 139
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,179member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    Samsung is going to win this one.



     


    When you turn on to be wrong, can you finally ban yourself so we can be rid of your fucking trolling? I've yet to see a shadow of a shred of a fact or objectivity in any of your posts. Just drive by trolling bullshit. 

  • Reply 40 of 139
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,701member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


     


    His argument is about the phones physical design.


     


    YOUR argument is about the OS design.


     


    TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS.


     


    Stick with the program wise guy.


     


    Dont try to play at words.





    WTF??  It was a valid comparison.  If it weren't for Apple, Samsung and everyone else would be making Blackberry / Nokia clones.  

     

Sign In or Register to comment.