Apple posts new notice saying Samsung didn't copy iPad on UK website

1456810

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 188

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    Do you like Apples?











    WOW. Do I see 7 "different" tests here? You could post some more pictures image.

    This all is ONLY one benchmark and it ONLY measures the GPU performance of OpenGL ES implementations.

    Apple has always performed better in GLBench. than the other devices, probably that's why Anandtech focuses on this particular benchmark when reviewing Apple devices so much image.



    CPU? Now that what I'm talking about.

    Geekbench: iPad (4th gen)   -   1755

    Geekbench: Nexus 10         -    2345



    Does this mean that iPad shows more potential in playing 3D games, while Nexus 10 shows more potential in being actually productive?





     

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 142 of 188
    ^ Not at all. Didn't read my post I see. iPad is better at everything than the Nexus 10.

    Despite Exynos scoring faster in CPU it's still slower in productivity and application performance. You know, real world usage. Android is a bloated pig of an OS compared to iOS or Win RT, which are both highly optimized.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 143 of 188
    Seems they put a bit of new code on the apple.com/uk site so that the statement text always ends up just below the screen no matter what.

    Self centred or what?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 144 of 188
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by aBeliefSystem View Post



    Self centred or what?


     


    An apt description of your post, seeing as the javascript discussion was brought up pages ago.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 145 of 188
    jnjnjnjnjnjn Posts: 588member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    I love how browser "benchmarks" are the only ones in which Apple isn't leagues faster than absolutely everything else on the market, and so the trolls latch onto them as though they mean anything at all. 



     


    That, and we know it's all about GPU nowadays.


     


    J.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 146 of 188
    jnjnjnjnjnjn Posts: 588member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Nathillien View Post




    WOW. Do I see 7 "different" tests here? You could post some more pictures image.

    This all is ONLY one benchmark and it ONLY measures the GPU performance of OpenGL ES implementations.

    Apple has always performed better in GLBench. than the other devices, probably that's why Anandtech focuses on this particular benchmark when reviewing Apple devices so much image.



    CPU? Now that what I'm talking about.

    Geekbench: iPad (4th gen)   -   1755

    Geekbench: Nexus 10         -    2345



    Does this mean that iPad shows more potential in playing 3D games, while Nexus 10 shows more potential in being actually productive?





     



     


    Actually no, iOS can offload calculation intensive tasks to its GPU(s), its called OpenCL.


    So the iPad is in fact a much better device to be 'productive'.


     


    By the way, did you notice that the iPad 4 is almost twice as fast as the N10 if you look at the GPU and only 25% 'slower' if you look at the CPU.


     


    J.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 147 of 188
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,772member


    What was the topic of this thread again?image

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 148 of 188
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 149 of 188


    Originally Posted by Nathillien View Post

    WOW. Do I see 7 "different" tests here?


     


    Sounds like you don't understand what benchmarks are.





    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

    What was the topic of this thread again?image


     


    Some whiny British people demanding the same thing twice. It's not important. image


     


    Other than Apple doing it right both times, yeah. 


     


    It's hilarious that no one commenting on this thing seems to have a clue what actually went on at the end, much less the beginning, or even before it. If they're not going to take the time to find out the truth, there's not really any reason to listen to them at all.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 150 of 188

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Other than Apple doing it right both times, yeah. 


     


    It's hilarious that no one commenting on this thing seems to have a clue what actually went on at the end, much less the beginning, or even before it. If they're not going to take the time to find out the truth, there's not really any reason to listen to them at all.



     


    Please do enlighten us then.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 151 of 188


    Originally Posted by stike vomit View Post

    Please do enlighten us then.


     


    No. We've had four threads about that already. If you can't read the existing explanations across them (while even being in one of them), I don't think doing it again will be of any use.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 152 of 188

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    No. We've had four threads about that already. If you can't read the existing explanations across them (while even being in one of them), I don't think doing it again will be of any use.



     


    I have read plenty about all of this and I am confident that I have a firm grasp of the facts. However, we appear to have come to very different conclusions. Maybe I didn't drink enough Kool-Aid first?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 153 of 188


    Originally Posted by stike vomit View Post

    Maybe I didn't drink enough Kool-Aid first?


     


    Just not the right kind, it seems.


     


    image


     


    image

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 154 of 188
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member


    deleted

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 155 of 188
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    I don't know why these benchmarks matter anyway with them so close to each other. Is there seriously much difference in browsing speeds and responsiveness between the most recent iPhones and iPads and the most recent Android phones and tablets? Not that I'm aware of. Both OS's are speedy, both platforms have features unique to them, both have good hardware.and the latest devices from both get high marks from professional blogs and reviewers. Any more it's almost like arguing between Ford and Chevrolet trucks. Almost. Still a ways to go for Android, but you get the basic point.

    and yeah I know, Apple is more like a <insert favorite luxury car>

    When they very close they don't matter. With JS it's pretty pointless these days as there are many other viable factors to consider. That said, when you have a less optimized OS like Android compared to iOS you need to have faster HW just to keep up with most real world tasks so when even the HW benchmarks show that a new Android device is well below an Apple product it calls things into question.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 156 of 188

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    <...>


     


    It's hilarious that no one commenting on this thing seems to have a clue what actually went on at the end, much less the beginning, or even before it. If they're not going to take the time to find out the truth, there's not really any reason to listen to them at all.



     


     


    if you checked the facts, you'd know better, but regular readers will know that you don't let the facts bother you


     


    unlike what i suspect to be representative of the whining fanboys that infest this site, i've been an apple user since the last century and own a pleasant mound of their shares


     


    apple's senior management acted like spoiled brats when the orginal judgement went against it, the pr statement after they lost had to be approved, it was a blatant insult to the court and a denial of the facts, let's be clear it was lies, apple lied


     


    the judge, rightly, directed them to state the facts, not apple newspeak


     


    they repeated their childish behaviour with the initial web page, which anyone but a fanboy blinded by zealotry can see was a deliberate and calculated insult to the court


     


    now they barely scrape in, with yet another pathetic attempt to look clever, the fanboys cheer, a great day for apple!


     


    but all it does is reinforce the impression of an arrogant and insular management team, taking time to play infantile games, rather than ensuring that their products work properly when released and that they continue to innovate, rather than recapitulate, which seems to be the way they are heading


     


    yet another sad day for apple, ever closer to what it once rebelled against

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 157 of 188


    Originally Posted by umumum View Post

    if you checked the facts, you'd know better, but regular readers will know that you don't let the facts bother you…


     


    So enlighten me, because I know them already.


     




    unlike what i suspect to be representative of the whining fanboys that infest this site, i've been an apple user since the last century and own a pleasant mound of their shares




     


    This old schtick again?


     


    image


     




    apple's senior management acted like spoiled brats when the original judgement went against it…




     


    Spoiled brats who… posted the judgement verbatim.


     




    …and a denial of the facts…




     


    A denial of the facts… by posting exactly what the judge told them to post. "Denying the facts" would be saying the British judgement isn't a complete farce.


     




    …let's be clear it was lies, apple lied…




     


    Yes! Let's be clear! About what did Apple lie? The judgement? NOPE. They did what the court said. That Samsung lost cases in Germany and the US? NOPE. That's true, too.


     




    the judge, rightly, directed them to state the facts, not apple newspeak




     


    And so Apple posted THE EXACT SAME WORDS AGAIN. So they were lies the first time but not the second?


     




    …which anyone but a fanboy blinded by zealotry can see was a deliberate and calculated insult to the court…




     


    Is this really the right website for you?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 158 of 188

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    And so Apple posted THE EXACT SAME WORDS AGAIN. So they were lies the first time but not the second?


     



     


    On what planet is a statement containing 360 words the EXACT same words as one containing 105 words?


     


    Oh, I see, you mean the court mandated text.  So you're conveniently forgetting the extra stuff they added to the original statement which is the WHOLE REASON they had to republish.


     


    Jeez, your Apple blindness knows no bounds.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 159 of 188


    Originally Posted by reefoid View Post

    On what planet is a statement containing 360 words the EXACT same words as one containing 105 words?


     


    When the words posted the second time were the words directly relevant to the legal ruling.  Something you acknowledge.


     



    So you're conveniently forgetting the extra stuff they added to the original statement which is the WHOLE REASON they had to republish.



     


    No, I'm ignoring it because the court had no right to prevent Apple from posting that as well. Apple did exactly what the court demanded, twice, and they're probably going to go after Apple again. 


     


    Your argument is that since Apple says any words about the iPad anywhere on their website that were not limited to what the court said Apple could say about the iPad, they're in violation of whatever blah de blah of the blah de blah. Nonsense.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 160 of 188

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    When the words posted the second time were the words directly relevant to the legal ruling.  Something you acknowledge.


     


     


    No, I'm ignoring it because the court had no right to prevent Apple from posting that as well. Apple did exactly what the court demanded, twice, and they're probably going to go after Apple again. 


     


    Your argument is that since Apple says any words about the iPad anywhere on their website that were not limited to what the court said Apple could say about the iPad, they're in violation of whatever blah de blah of the blah de blah. Nonsense.



    As usual TS, your arguments are full of smoke and mirrors.


     


    Clearly the court did have a right to prevent Apple posting inaccurate stuff (yes, yes, I know you don't agree it was inaccurate), because the court told them to republish and Apple did.  If the court had no right, why didn't Apple go back to court and tell the judge where he went wrong with his ruling?


     


    Not sure what you mean by your last paragraph.  Where have I argued anything about Apple using words about the iPad anywhere on their site?  Are you confusing me with someone else?  In fact, I've never mentioned the iPad in any of this nonsense, because the case was never about the iPad but a registered design from 2004.


     


    Like I say, smoke and mirrors.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.