"When asked about his thoughts on rival companies that reference designs like that of the iPhone, Ive says, "It's theft." Without pointing fingers, he notes that copycat products are not just copying design, but "thousands and thousands of hours of struggle."
Well I don't see a real problem with millions of knock off iPhones in the world. I know they exist but who ever sees one. As far as competitors copying the iPhone, it still is not an iPhone so where is the loss. Maybe if the copying never happened, Apple would have 200 billion in the bank and Ive would have so much money that even his great grandchildren would never run out. Never enough for some. Poor Jony and his terrible life struggle.
It's really too bad because Samsung is a great company from a component and product engineering standpoint.
Samsung is good at cloning other companies' products and very efficiently mass producing and distributing them globally. If you look at every other market segment they're in, you will find the same pattern of blatantly copying designs from true innovators and then stealing the market from them.
As an example, here is Dyson's revolutionary, patented vacuum cleaner next to Samsung's me-too offering:
The reason most people are unaware of this is that few companies have the capital necessary to enter a drawn out legal battle with a company the size of Samsung.
The anti-Apple crowd likes to use the LG Prada as being the device Apple "copied" and yet it was only a single touch device that had no option to pinch and zoom. Then you have BB devices that used resistive touchscreens. Would Samsung have launched such a device or Google had written Android to support that input? I think so, because they do seem to throw a lot of stuff at the wall as it is, but with no focus so without having the iPhone and iOS as objects to go after, I think it's unlikely it would have been very good.
I've heard it said that Apple entered the market just as capacitive touchscreen technology was beginning to mature, so that they were the first to take advantage of the multitouch interface enabled by such hardware. I think Samsung and others would have eventually produced capacitive touchscreen devices, but their first showing would not have been as strong as Apple's in terms of overall polish, especially if they would have had to roll their own OS. Even now, their software skills seem mostly limited to developing UI skins, with Google doing most of the backend heavy lifting.
I've heard it said that Apple entered the market just as capacitive touchscreen technology was beginning to mature, so that they were the first to take advantage of the multitouch interface enabled by such hardware. I think Samsung and others would have eventually produced capacitive touchscreen devices, but their first showing would not have been as strong as Apple's in terms of overall polish, especially if they would have had to roll their own OS. Even now, their software skills seem mostly limited to developing UI skins, with Google doing most of the backend heavy lifting.
Also consider Synaptic's touchpads. Even today with a decade(?) of use by other PC OEMs only Apple's touchpads seem to work great.
Well I don't see a real problem with millions of knock off iPhones in the world. I know they exist but who ever sees one.
So you don't know anyone who owns a Samsung phone?
Quote:
Maybe if the copying never happened, Apple would have 200 billion in the bank and Ive would have so much money that even his great grandchildren would never run out. Never enough for some. Poor Jony and his terrible life struggle.
Because all that money should go to Samsung's poor investors instead? At least Jony actually puts in hours at a job creating things of value.
Just about makes you wish North Korea would get their act together and start reunification already.
Instead of the countless deaths that would create, I would much rather see a very inspired hacker target the finances of Samsung's upper echelon. A nice, tailored virus that would track down every single ill-gotten won and transfer it untraceably to a series of highly-deserving charities.
When I say knock off I mean intent to copy exactly. A fake iPhone, not a similar design like a Samsung. Where do you draw the line. Only the first car can have four wheels?
Instead of the countless deaths that would create, I would much rather see a very inspired hacker target the finances of Samsung's upper echelon. A nice, tailored virus that would track down every single ill-gotten won and transfer it untraceably to a series of highly-deserving charities.
While he’s in there, have him release all of Samsung’s internal documents to the press.
When I say knock off I mean intent to copy exactly. A fake iPhone, not a similar design like a Samsung. Where do you draw the line. Only the first car can have four wheels?
The initial set of Samsung's capacitive touchscreen phones which came out shortly after the iPhone were pretty much knockoffs. It's only after losing a patent suit and a few more years to finally come up with their own designs, that they now wouldn't be considered as such. This is mostly what Jony is referring to.
"Honest questions: are there any phones being sold since 2012 that look even remotely similar with the iPhone or iPad? Does someone even think that the 100 million people that bought a galaxy S or note last year, did it because they thought that they were buying iPhones? Do we really see Android as a stolen product instead of an Amazing viable alternative?
Please, let's be rational here. If Apple wants those costumers, cut the crap and give them a product that they want to buy instead of a dressing only the needs of half the premium market. The argument of copying died with Steve, we have different distinct products and a huge number of people pay the same amount of money for other products for a reason."
If you really want to be honest the whole Droid ecosystem is made of stolen parts: - Android stolen by Google from Sun now Oracle Java, currently in the courts - Hardware design and UI stolen from Apple - 2 convictions other cases pending.
Honest questions: are there any phones being sold since 2012 that look even remotely similar with the iPhone or iPad? Does someone even think that the 100 million people that bought a galaxy S or note last year, did it because they thought that they were buying iPhones? Do we really see Android as a stolen product instead of an Amazing viable alternative?
Please, let's be rational here. If Apple wants those costumers, cut the crap and give them a product that they want to buy instead of a dressing only the needs of half the premium market. The argument of copying died with Steve, we have different distinct products and a huge number of people pay the same amount of money for other products for a reason.
If you really want "honesty" then here it goes.
The whole droid ecosystem is based on stolen parts, it's like putting together a car based on a truck load of stolen parts then marketing the crap out of it:
- Android was stolen by Google from Sun now Oracle Java - court case ongoing
- Hardware designs and UI stolen from Apple - 2 convictions - more pending in court
On principle alone I am always amazed at the number of people that jump up to blow Samsung's trumpet.
IMO the only other company making a genuine effort to innovate on its own is probably BlackBerry.
For this reason, if I were ever to move from iPhone my choice would probably be BlackBerry.
@freedivertx: that particular article is from 2009 and is not related in anyway to the current lawsuit (ie, steering mech patent) Dyson recently DROPPED.
Last August Dyson issued proceedings against Samsung for a patented appliance steering mechanism on its MotoSync range, which it claimed the Korean manufacturer was infringing. When Samsung's lawyers presented prior art, which it maintained belonged to the company, Dyson was forced to withdraw the action that had been filed. It could not pursue the claim due to loopholes in the patent system.
Dyson's version of triple cyclone tech was patented in the 90's and has since expired -- it's an old tech that used by pretty much everyone.
Honest questions: are there any phones being sold since 2012 that look even remotely similar with the iPhone or iPad? Does someone even think that the 100 million people that bought a galaxy S or note last year, did it because they thought that they were buying iPhones? Do we really see Android as a stolen product instead of an Amazing viable alternative?
Please, let's be rational here. If Apple wants those costumers, cut the crap and give them a product that they want to buy instead of a dressing only the needs of half the premium market. The argument of copying died with Steve, we have different distinct products and a huge number of people pay the same amount of money for other products for a reason.
Sammy is a thief. Apple spent 100s or 1000s of man hours and took a lot a risk. Sammy just copied with little risk (patent infringement not withstanding)
pedromartins, current Samsung phones may no longer look exactly like the iPhones, but that came about only because of the recent court cases. Think about this: would Samsung phones look the way they do today, if the iPhone did not come along? We know that it took Samsung 200 days to replicate what Apple accomplished only after several years of hard work. You will not appreciate the pain if you have not created truly epic products before. If you are not convinced take note: carefully observe current Samsung Gear offerings, and how they will look like a few months after Apple debuts its rumored iWatch. Then compare how long (plus the cost and struggle) it took Apple to come up with such a product and how long it takes their competitors to rush knockoffs to the market. If we just allow anyone to copy stuff, what would be the point in anyone busting their butts to come up with truly great products?
I always find Jonny's interviews fascinating. You really get to feel the deepness of his beliefs, passionate, and dedication. He takes this shit seriously. I'm confident we'll continue to see incredible things from him going forward.
Don't forget their blackberry ripoff back in the day, which even copied small, meaningless details. They also had the nerve to call it the "blackjack". There are thousands of other examples. The company really is shameless in this, but it's gotten them enormous success. The one thing I don't understand are the people who cheer for them and want them to sink the companies that they've ripped off.
the iPhone... I use it, and I use it well. But it's just a phone. There's nothing intimate with it.
And sometimes, it's even complicated to do easy stuff with it!
Comments
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/17/samsung-dyson-vacuum-cleaner-patent-copyright
Well I don't see a real problem with millions of knock off iPhones in the world. I know they exist but who ever sees one. As far as competitors copying the iPhone, it still is not an iPhone so where is the loss. Maybe if the copying never happened, Apple would have 200 billion in the bank and Ive would have so much money that even his great grandchildren would never run out. Never enough for some. Poor Jony and his terrible life struggle.
It's really too bad because Samsung is a great company from a component and product engineering standpoint.
Samsung is good at cloning other companies' products and very efficiently mass producing and distributing them globally. If you look at every other market segment they're in, you will find the same pattern of blatantly copying designs from true innovators and then stealing the market from them.
As an example, here is Dyson's revolutionary, patented vacuum cleaner next to Samsung's me-too offering:
The reason most people are unaware of this is that few companies have the capital necessary to enter a drawn out legal battle with a company the size of Samsung.
That's unbelievable. Just unbelievable.
Just about makes you wish North Korea would get their act together and start reunification already.
The anti-Apple crowd likes to use the LG Prada as being the device Apple "copied" and yet it was only a single touch device that had no option to pinch and zoom. Then you have BB devices that used resistive touchscreens. Would Samsung have launched such a device or Google had written Android to support that input? I think so, because they do seem to throw a lot of stuff at the wall as it is, but with no focus so without having the iPhone and iOS as objects to go after, I think it's unlikely it would have been very good.
I've heard it said that Apple entered the market just as capacitive touchscreen technology was beginning to mature, so that they were the first to take advantage of the multitouch interface enabled by such hardware. I think Samsung and others would have eventually produced capacitive touchscreen devices, but their first showing would not have been as strong as Apple's in terms of overall polish, especially if they would have had to roll their own OS. Even now, their software skills seem mostly limited to developing UI skins, with Google doing most of the backend heavy lifting.
Also consider Synaptic's touchpads. Even today with a decade(?) of use by other PC OEMs only Apple's touchpads seem to work great.
Well I don't see a real problem with millions of knock off iPhones in the world. I know they exist but who ever sees one.
So you don't know anyone who owns a Samsung phone?
Because all that money should go to Samsung's poor investors instead? At least Jony actually puts in hours at a job creating things of value.
Just about makes you wish North Korea would get their act together and start reunification already.
Instead of the countless deaths that would create, I would much rather see a very inspired hacker target the finances of Samsung's upper echelon. A nice, tailored virus that would track down every single ill-gotten won and transfer it untraceably to a series of highly-deserving charities.
When I say knock off I mean intent to copy exactly. A fake iPhone, not a similar design like a Samsung. Where do you draw the line. Only the first car can have four wheels?
Instead of the countless deaths that would create, I would much rather see a very inspired hacker target the finances of Samsung's upper echelon. A nice, tailored virus that would track down every single ill-gotten won and transfer it untraceably to a series of highly-deserving charities.
While he’s in there, have him release all of Samsung’s internal documents to the press.
When I say knock off I mean intent to copy exactly. A fake iPhone, not a similar design like a Samsung. Where do you draw the line. Only the first car can have four wheels?
The initial set of Samsung's capacitive touchscreen phones which came out shortly after the iPhone were pretty much knockoffs. It's only after losing a patent suit and a few more years to finally come up with their own designs, that they now wouldn't be considered as such. This is mostly what Jony is referring to.
Originally Posted by pedromartins
"Honest questions: are there any phones being sold since 2012 that look even remotely similar with the iPhone or iPad? Does someone even think that the 100 million people that bought a galaxy S or note last year, did it because they thought that they were buying iPhones? Do we really see Android as a stolen product instead of an Amazing viable alternative?
Please, let's be rational here. If Apple wants those costumers, cut the crap and give them a product that they want to buy instead of a dressing only the needs of half the premium market. The argument of copying died with Steve, we have different distinct products and a huge number of people pay the same amount of money for other products for a reason."
If you really want to be honest the whole Droid ecosystem is made of stolen parts:
- Android stolen by Google from Sun now Oracle Java, currently in the courts
- Hardware design and UI stolen from Apple - 2 convictions other cases pending.
Let's be honest.
Honest questions: are there any phones being sold since 2012 that look even remotely similar with the iPhone or iPad? Does someone even think that the 100 million people that bought a galaxy S or note last year, did it because they thought that they were buying iPhones? Do we really see Android as a stolen product instead of an Amazing viable alternative?
Please, let's be rational here. If Apple wants those costumers, cut the crap and give them a product that they want to buy instead of a dressing only the needs of half the premium market. The argument of copying died with Steve, we have different distinct products and a huge number of people pay the same amount of money for other products for a reason.
If you really want "honesty" then here it goes.
The whole droid ecosystem is based on stolen parts, it's like putting together a car based on a truck load of stolen parts then marketing the crap out of it:
- Android was stolen by Google from Sun now Oracle Java - court case ongoing
- Hardware designs and UI stolen from Apple - 2 convictions - more pending in court
On principle alone I am always amazed at the number of people that jump up to blow Samsung's trumpet.
IMO the only other company making a genuine effort to innovate on its own is probably BlackBerry.
For this reason, if I were ever to move from iPhone my choice would probably be BlackBerry.
Samsung to pay Dyson Technology over patent dispute
http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKLD64172920090213?irpc=932
@freedivertx: that particular article is from 2009 and is not related in anyway to the current lawsuit (ie, steering mech patent) Dyson recently DROPPED.
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-02/17/dyson-samsung-lawsuit:
Dyson's version of triple cyclone tech was patented in the 90's and has since expired -- it's an old tech that used by pretty much everyone.
Sammy is a thief. Apple spent 100s or 1000s of man hours and took a lot a risk. Sammy just copied with little risk (patent infringement not withstanding)
I always find Jonny's interviews fascinating. You really get to feel the deepness of his beliefs, passionate, and dedication. He takes this shit seriously. I'm confident we'll continue to see incredible things from him going forward.
That's unbelievable. Just unbelievable.
Don't forget their blackberry ripoff back in the day, which even copied small, meaningless details. They also had the nerve to call it the "blackjack". There are thousands of other examples. The company really is shameless in this, but it's gotten them enormous success. The one thing I don't understand are the people who cheer for them and want them to sink the companies that they've ripped off.
Nothing could be further from the truth.