Apple. Did. Exactly. What. The. Court. Stated. No one can read what was posted and fail to comprehend that they lost to Samsung in the UK. You cannot possibly state otherwise.
Not only am I stating otherwise, so did Sir Robin Jacob, an IP expert in the most senior appeals court in the UK save for the Supreme Court. Documentary evidence was also provided that you completely failed to read.
Quote:
They have no jurisdiction over any order but their own. Apple can post whatever it wants about any other order they received. You fail to comprehend this.
This is simply not true. Apple did post whatever they wanted, they were ordered to remove it and replace it with an explicit notice and they complied with this order. You are telling me that not only am I wrong, but the Court of Appeals is wrong and Apple's legal representatives are wrong. I think it much more likely that you are wrong.
Quote:
Oh boy, here we go.
No idea what this is referencing, if you're not American then perhaps I misspoke.
Um... look at the picture in the story. Again. And again…. Until you get it.
Right but there's plenty of examples of similar looking phones and phones with similar functionality etc before the iPhone. Not that I'm arguing they were a success or anything. Just saying that you can easily show things in a less distinct light than Apple's view of things.
You know, I had a Windows Mobile smartphone (actually two I think) before the iPhone. God it was awful. I don't really know much about the competitors back then but compared to smartphones of today the WM ones were more proto-smartphones.
The thing is, I don't think there's really a strict line you can draw between these sorts of phones. I can't think of a great way to distinguish where proto becomes real-smartphone.
You can say that about many things. Products evolve over time, but I'd say that the phones that had complete keyboards and needed a separate data plans were the first smartphones.
Um... look at the picture in the story. Again. And again…. Until you get it.
Are you saying that the phones in the 'before' weren't smartphones? Yes they lacked some functionality but they still were smartphones. That's like saying CRT TVs weren't televisions, because of the current crop of TVs are so much better.
Samsung won the 'cloning' lawsuits. Both in Germany and the UK. That was the court case where Apple violated the order and lied about it badly enough to have to carry a message on their homepage for a month.
Plus, haven't they settled out at a total of under $1B so far for patent infringement?
They won in the UK because the judge ruled that Samsung weren't copying Apple because Apple products were cool and Samsung products weren't. Says it all really.
NB I own a Samsung tablet as well as an iPad 2 and an iPad mini retina and the Samsung tablet is not in the same class as the iPads.
Apple can comply exactly with the words of an order but fail to meet its spirit. This is indeed exactly what happened:
That’s nice. You’ve just stated that nothing ever meets anyone’s requirements.
Apple were ordered to place a revised notice exactly as a result of adding their material to the original, resulting in the 'meaning and intention' of the original order becoming unclear.
No LG were not very successful with the Prada (as you very well know), mostly because they lacked a snake-oil-salesman, a la Steve Jobs.
So what, you looked at the pictures and decided that the Prada was the originator of the smartphone era and simply lacked a good salesman?
As others have said, there were plenty of "smart" phones before the Prada (Palm, WinMo, BB). And just because the Prada looks like an iPhone, but came beforehand, doesn't make it the same product.
Did it integrate well with both Mac and Windows: sync + backup all your contacts, calendars, photos, and music on both platforms? How was the battery life? Was the user interface intuitive, fluid, and well designed? How capable was the web browser on it? Could you easily purchase and view/listen to content (music, movies, etc) directly on it without needing a computer?
The thing that made the iPhone the first great "smartphone" IMO, is that Apple took the time to get all of the little details right (in addition to the design). Prior to it, there were very few smartphones that worked well with both Mac and Windows. And most of them had shoddy interfaces which were based on a hacked version of a desktop operating system (Windows Mobile, mobile variants of Linux, etc) and tended to be difficult to use. They didn't take the time and/or have the in-house talent + resources to rethink everything from top to bottom the way Apple did.
My daughter owned the LG Prada. It kept freezing and she returned it and replaced it with the Samsung Tocca. Neither was what I regard as being a smartphone.
You can say that about many things. Products evolve over time, but I'd say that the phones that had complete keyboards and needed a separate data plans were the first smartphones.
I don't know if I would classify any device that sacrificed large chunks of it's display space for a fixed, unable to be updated input method 'smart'.
That’s nice. You’ve just stated that nothing ever meets anyone’s requirements.
Except that didn’t happen.
You know the funniest part about this? The poster above you gets the case wrong. Something you claim never happens just happened in front of your eyes. Will you still continue to deny that you know the law better than Apple's own legal counsel? Better than one of the highest powered Judges in the UK?
I'm guessing the answer will be that you can't face that you are incorrect.
Unfortunately, none of those phones generated the term 'crisis of design' at Samsung.
Agreed. I'm much more a fan of Google's latest designs. I own a Nexus 5 and I love the fact that it's mostly just a black glass slate that's barely got any visible adornments. Understated works really well. Samsung's latest stuff is powerful and impressive in some ways, but man they need to hire some real designers.
Had to get an account so I could join in on all this fun! tallest skil is awesome. That's all for now; he seems to be taking care of troll slaying in this room.
You can say that about many things. Products evolve over time, but I'd say that the phones that had complete keyboards and needed a separate data plans were the first smartphones.
The Windows Mobile phones I had certainly meet all the 'modern' criteria other than perhaps a capacitive screen. That's why I think that whole era should really be 'proto-smartphones'. I would probably argue the first iPhone should be in with that too. Once it gained the App Store it was all upward from there.
Comments
Apple. Did. Exactly. What. The. Court. Stated. No one can read what was posted and fail to comprehend that they lost to Samsung in the UK. You cannot possibly state otherwise.Not only am I stating otherwise, so did Sir Robin Jacob, an IP expert in the most senior appeals court in the UK save for the Supreme Court. Documentary evidence was also provided that you completely failed to read.
This is simply not true. Apple did post whatever they wanted, they were ordered to remove it and replace it with an explicit notice and they complied with this order. You are telling me that not only am I wrong, but the Court of Appeals is wrong and Apple's legal representatives are wrong. I think it much more likely that you are wrong.
No idea what this is referencing, if you're not American then perhaps I misspoke.
I don't think there's really a strict line you can draw between these sorts of phones.
Um... look at the picture in the story. Again. And again…. Until you get it.
Um... look at the picture in the story. Again. And again…. Until you get it.
Right but there's plenty of examples of similar looking phones and phones with similar functionality etc before the iPhone. Not that I'm arguing they were a success or anything. Just saying that you can easily show things in a less distinct light than Apple's view of things.
You can say that about many things. Products evolve over time, but I'd say that the phones that had complete keyboards and needed a separate data plans were the first smartphones.
Hey trolls! say something bad about the iPad Air (other besides being expensive) i dare you
Are you saying that the phones in the 'before' weren't smartphones? Yes they lacked some functionality but they still were smartphones. That's like saying CRT TVs weren't televisions, because of the current crop of TVs are so much better.
They won in the UK because the judge ruled that Samsung weren't copying Apple because Apple products were cool and Samsung products weren't. Says it all really.
NB I own a Samsung tablet as well as an iPad 2 and an iPad mini retina and the Samsung tablet is not in the same class as the iPads.
Apple can comply exactly with the words of an order but fail to meet its spirit. This is indeed exactly what happened:
That’s nice. You’ve just stated that nothing ever meets anyone’s requirements.
Except that didn’t happen.
Nah, see, I’m using exactly what was said.
No LG were not very successful with the Prada (as you very well know), mostly because they lacked a snake-oil-salesman, a la Steve Jobs.
So what, you looked at the pictures and decided that the Prada was the originator of the smartphone era and simply lacked a good salesman?
As others have said, there were plenty of "smart" phones before the Prada (Palm, WinMo, BB). And just because the Prada looks like an iPhone, but came beforehand, doesn't make it the same product.
Did it integrate well with both Mac and Windows: sync + backup all your contacts, calendars, photos, and music on both platforms? How was the battery life? Was the user interface intuitive, fluid, and well designed? How capable was the web browser on it? Could you easily purchase and view/listen to content (music, movies, etc) directly on it without needing a computer?
The thing that made the iPhone the first great "smartphone" IMO, is that Apple took the time to get all of the little details right (in addition to the design). Prior to it, there were very few smartphones that worked well with both Mac and Windows. And most of them had shoddy interfaces which were based on a hacked version of a desktop operating system (Windows Mobile, mobile variants of Linux, etc) and tended to be difficult to use. They didn't take the time and/or have the in-house talent + resources to rethink everything from top to bottom the way Apple did.
My daughter owned the LG Prada. It kept freezing and she returned it and replaced it with the Samsung Tocca. Neither was what I regard as being a smartphone.
You should really stop trolling.
Every person who used a Windows/Mac or Android/iOS products "fact myself" knows that Macs or iOS are better products!
I don't know if I would classify any device that sacrificed large chunks of it's display space for a fixed, unable to be updated input method 'smart'.
Unfortunately, none of those phones generated the term 'crisis of design' at Samsung.
When you're on the classification committee let me know.
That’s nice. You’ve just stated that nothing ever meets anyone’s requirements.
Except that didn’t happen.
You know the funniest part about this? The poster above you gets the case wrong. Something you claim never happens just happened in front of your eyes. Will you still continue to deny that you know the law better than Apple's own legal counsel? Better than one of the highest powered Judges in the UK?
I'm guessing the answer will be that you can't face that you are incorrect.
And you know this how?
Unfortunately, none of those phones generated the term 'crisis of design' at Samsung.
Agreed. I'm much more a fan of Google's latest designs. I own a Nexus 5 and I love the fact that it's mostly just a black glass slate that's barely got any visible adornments. Understated works really well. Samsung's latest stuff is powerful and impressive in some ways, but man they need to hire some real designers.
That's all for now; he seems to be taking care of troll slaying in this room.
You can say that about many things. Products evolve over time, but I'd say that the phones that had complete keyboards and needed a separate data plans were the first smartphones.
The Windows Mobile phones I had certainly meet all the 'modern' criteria other than perhaps a capacitive screen. That's why I think that whole era should really be 'proto-smartphones'. I would probably argue the first iPhone should be in with that too. Once it gained the App Store it was all upward from there.
And you know this how?
J. K. Shin, Samsung's Head of Mobile Communications told me.
http://allthingsd.com/20120806/iphone-caused-crisis-of-design-at-samsung-memo/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/briancaulfield/2012/08/06/iphone-sparked-crisis-of-design-at-samsung/
http://news.cnet.com/2300-13579_3-10013512-3.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/02/us-samsung-culture-idUSBRE8810B320120902