Your example fails. Every car and TV have details or style elements that set them apart. If they all look the same to you it is because you have no taste and can not discern quality or details. What does make SOME TVs look the same is that SOME brands have a few other companies manufacture products for them and do not specify unique details for their brands. So, TVs, refrigerators and washers and dryers roll out the back door of Samsung in boxes marked with different brands on them. In addition, Samsung has been slavishly copying appliances made my other companies for decades... they didn't just start with iPhones. That unbridled copying of products has led to Samsung products being confused with other products, but that doesn't mean it was right since the original designer did not sue for economic reasons. This is why Samsung is so determined to not pay Apple for stealing Apple's designs, it sets a precedent that will affect Samsung out into the future in all kinds of markets other than phones.
Wow aren't you daft. You missed the point entirely
1) Do you have any proof that Android was "dominate" in 2009 when Schmidt was forced to step down from Apple's board or in 2008 when Schdmit's role on the board was being minimized?
2) Really?! Steve Jobs didn't know what he's talking about? His many successes in life over 4 decades and multiple product categories and companies were all just dumb luck?
Misrepresenting history. Steve Jobs had no problem with Android until it became dominate. Those are the facts. Once Android started to overtae the iPhone in marketshare that is when Steve Jobs started having a problem with Android. Look at his original comments on Android when it was first released and he welcomed the competition.
When it came to Android he didn't. And yes a lot of the success he had was luck. To say it wasn't is wrong.
Now HTC is paying trolls? Will Sammy's "influence" never end!
You wish I was a HTC paid troll. And if I was do you really think my username would be HTC4Life? And if I was I wouldn't be on this site. Anyone who posts a opposing view point must be a paid troll. Is that how it is now? You have a pathetic outlook.
Misrepresenting history. Steve Jobs had no problem with Android until it became dominate. Those are the facts. Once Android started to overtae the iPhone in marketshare that is when Steve Jobs started having a problem with Android. Look at his original comments on Android when it was first released and he welcomed the competition.
When it came to Android he didn't. And yes a lot of the success he had was luck. To say it wasn't is wrong.
1) Explain to me the luck of Pixar. Or the iPhone? Or the Mac? Or the iPad? What I see is a lot focus and drive to make something excellent. It seems improbable that Steve just happened to get lucky for 4 decades across multiple businesses and products but if you want to argue that Steve was an idiot who had no talent or skills I'm more than willing to hear you out.
2) Again, what dominance did Android have when Schmidt was dropped from the board? What dominance do they even have now in terms of a business model that matches Apple's? Remember Apple makes a complete product and I don't see the Nexus HW with Android even coming close to selling in volume of what Apple sells? Is there even an Android-based OEM that sells as smartphones or tablets of a single model in volumes or as quickly as Apple can… or are you just trying to paint a picture that a freely distributed OS is somehow on par with the iPhone and iPad products?
You wish I was a HTC paid troll. And if I was do you really think my username would be HTC4Life? And if I was I wouldn't be on this site. Anyone who posts a opposing view point must be a paid troll. Is that how it is now? You have a pathetic outlook.
I never said trolls were bright.
Opposing views are one thing. Outright lies are another.
Your last sentence is true EXCEPT for patents that are necessary to patent to participate in a market. For example, any patent that must be used to make a functional cell phone operational on a public system. These patents must be licensed and fall under that rules of FRAND. However, Apple patent that makes a list "bounce" when it scrolls to the end is part of trade dress and not required to scroll a list, therefore is not required to scroll a list, and Apple can refuse to license it to another company. This is one of the patents Samsung copied that is not essential and they do not want to pay Apple to use... see the diff??
I completely understand the difference. Here's an example:
Apple was recently found to infringe on patents owned by VirnetX. If they insisted on an injunction, refuse any infringing iPhones entry to the US, would that acceptable to you? Apple is illegally using patented tech not licensed to them and continues to do so with no complete workaround yet. Is that enough to warrant removal of the infringing devices from the market if the patent holder asks for it pending a settlement? It's only a couple of patents out of the several thousand required to sell a smartphone.
1) Explain to me the luck of Pixar. Or the iPhone? Or the Mac? Or the iPad? What I see is a lot focus and drive to make something excellent. It seems improbable that Steve just happened to get lucky for 4 decades across multiple businesses and products but if you want to argue that Steve was an idiot who had no talent or skills I'm more than willing to hear you out.
2) Again, what dominance did Android have when Schmidt was dropped from the board? What dominance do they even have now in terms of a business model that matches Apple's? Remember Apple makes a complete product and I don't see the Nexus HW with Android even coming close to selling in volume of what Apple sells? Is there even an Android-based OEM that sells as smartphones or tablets of a single model in volumes or as quickly as Apple can… or are you just trying to paint a picture that a freely distributed OS is somehow on par with the iPhone and iPad products?
What luck was their with the iPhone, or Mac or iPad? How about the luck of bring a product that people wanted. Tech experts said the iPad would be D.O.A and some said that about the iPhone as well. Luck was a factor in them being successful.
Eric Schmidt didn't resign because of Jobs feeling Android was stolen. Steve Jobs even commented on the resignation when it happened. Saying it was because of Android but because of to quote Steve Jobs ''Unfortunately, as Google enters more of Apple's core businesses, with Android and now Chrome OS, Eric's effectiveness as an Apple board member will be significantly diminished," See anything about being accused of stealing. Trying to rewrite history again.
We are not even talking about the Nexus. And the Nexus line is not aimed at the average consumer. Never has been really, with the exception of the Nexus 7 tablet, the Nexus line has always been aimed at and for developers. That is why you find top of the line hardware at a cheap price point. So they can sell unlocked phones from Google straight to the developer for 400 dollars and the developer knows they have spec wise the best specs available at the time and will not have to worry about carriers delaying OS updates. Tell you one Android based OEM that sells smartphones or tablets as quickly and in high volumes like Apple? Well yeah I can. It is the OEM i hate but Samsung has proven they can do that with the Galaxy S line of smartphones. They have proven they can sell them as quickly and in high volumes. So your statement their is false.
Can a freely disturbed OS be on par with iOS?
Well if you are talking about User experience yes. HTC has an amazing user experience. Motorola on the Moto X has an incredible user experience. As does the Nexus line. If you are talking in sales No because of course the OS on the most phones ie Android will own marketshare.
Opposing views are one thing. Outright lies are another.
Only I am not lying. I am stating my views and not said one lie yet you are calling me a troll. Must be republican who can't handle truth and other view points.
What the luck?! If you think the countless cost in R&D, prototypes, etc. were all luck then you're seriously lucked in head.
No but the fact that they were successful in the market was luck. The fact the iPhone became a huge success was luck. Doesn't matter how much spent on R&D, mate. They could have released the phone and it could have been a failure. They got lucky with its success.
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?
Sounds like somebody didn't hear about the billion-dollar court judgement against Samsung for, well, copying the iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Here’s my question. We know this. MARVIN has confirmed it. Why isn’t he banned? Why aren’t all his posts deleted?
Wait, you mean they actually ban the obvious anti-Apple trolls here??? Wow, how refreshing! Looks like I'm going to enjoy this forum so much better than MacRumors, where they not only tolerate the career haters, but fluff their pillows and place a mint on them.
Apple][ does take Apple's side blindly and to an excess (and his feelings on politics, minorities, and the poor come across to me as warped) but I at least think he's sincere in his beliefs and I do respect his passion even if I don't respect his positions.
SudoNym, on the other hand, sounds like an actual troll who is just saying whatever he thinks people that like Apple's products want to hear.
I'd much rather a person be honest enough with themselves and others to take a position they believe in over one they feel others will appreciate them having, no matter how grotesque I might think it is.
All trolls should be banned. It's possible to be a troll while acting overly positive about Apple. Just read any of SudoNym's posts.
Being overly-positive about Apple on an Apple-related website may be annoying, but I don't know that I'd call it trolling (unless it's obviously facetious and designed to antagonize). Where else would one go to be overly-positive about Apple?
But the Google/Samsung/Whatever zealots (see HTC4LIFE) always manage to find and make camp at the Apple-oriented sites. Aren't there Google/Samsung fan sites where they can virtually high-five each other over the perceived awesomeness of their chosen brands?
Say something bad about Google, Samsung or anti-Apple trolls in general at MacRumors and they show you the door. It's become a strange world.
I completely understand the difference. Here's an example:
Apple was recently found to infringe on patents owned by VirnetX. If they insisted on an injunction, refuse any infringing iPhones entry to the US, would that acceptable to you? Apple is illegally using patented tech not licensed to them and continues to do so with no complete workaround yet. Is that enough to warrant removal of the infringing devices from the market if the patent holder asks for it pending a settlement? It's only a couple of patents out of the several thousand required to sell a smartphone.
Good example. First off, since I'm unfamiliar with the nature of the patent, let's assume it is not an essential patent and subject to FRAND.
So, Apple is doing something that VirnetX says they have covered with a patent. We don't know that what VirnetX alleges is true or not, and Apple may or may not agree that VirnetX's patent is being infringed on. VirnetX may ask for an injunction and at that hearing Apple may testify that injunction relief is premature as it has not been legally determined that VirnetX's patent is indeed being infringed. It will take a trial to make that determination.
This rather like what happened in California with the Samsung vs Apple trial. It was not until AFTER Samsung lost that Apple could realistically ask for an injunction, and even then it was denied. If you recall, even during the trial it came out that Apple tried to work with Samsung to get payment for the patent disagreement, but Samsung refused the offer.
From what little I know of the VirnetX patent, I'm not sure VirnetX tried to negotiate a settlement prior to asking for an injunction. It may be possible they don't want monetary relief, and only wants Apple to not use their IP. If the latter, then it must be determined that VirnetX is in error or not and it will take a court case to settle the litigation. (Such as was done in the California Samsung vs Apple) So, lets not assume that "Apple is illegally using patented tech not licensed to them and continues to do so with no complete workaround." Sound right?
What luck was their with the iPhone, or Mac or iPad? How about the luck of bring a product that people wanted.
LOL, so is that what we call it? Luck???
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTC4LIFE
Only I am not lying. I am stating my views and not said one lie yet you are calling me a troll. Must be republican who can't handle truth and other view points.
And there it is: the completely irrelevant political card. Well-played.
(unless it's obviously facetious and designed to antagonize)
1) That's how his comments read to me.
2) Personally, I don't care if one loves or hates Apple, Samsung, Google or any other company or thing so long as one is making honest arguments that support their positions. I find this forum to have an abundance of excellent debaters.
Comments
Your example fails. Every car and TV have details or style elements that set them apart. If they all look the same to you it is because you have no taste and can not discern quality or details. What does make SOME TVs look the same is that SOME brands have a few other companies manufacture products for them and do not specify unique details for their brands. So, TVs, refrigerators and washers and dryers roll out the back door of Samsung in boxes marked with different brands on them. In addition, Samsung has been slavishly copying appliances made my other companies for decades... they didn't just start with iPhones. That unbridled copying of products has led to Samsung products being confused with other products, but that doesn't mean it was right since the original designer did not sue for economic reasons. This is why Samsung is so determined to not pay Apple for stealing Apple's designs, it sets a precedent that will affect Samsung out into the future in all kinds of markets other than phones.
Wow aren't you daft. You missed the point entirely
1) Do you have any proof that Android was "dominate" in 2009 when Schmidt was forced to step down from Apple's board or in 2008 when Schdmit's role on the board was being minimized?
2) Really?! Steve Jobs didn't know what he's talking about? His many successes in life over 4 decades and multiple product categories and companies were all just dumb luck?
Misrepresenting history. Steve Jobs had no problem with Android until it became dominate. Those are the facts. Once Android started to overtae the iPhone in marketshare that is when Steve Jobs started having a problem with Android. Look at his original comments on Android when it was first released and he welcomed the competition.
When it came to Android he didn't. And yes a lot of the success he had was luck. To say it wasn't is wrong.
Now HTC is paying trolls? Will Sammy's "influence" never end!
You wish I was a HTC paid troll. And if I was do you really think my username would be HTC4Life? And if I was I wouldn't be on this site. Anyone who posts a opposing view point must be a paid troll. Is that how it is now? You have a pathetic outlook.
1) Explain to me the luck of Pixar. Or the iPhone? Or the Mac? Or the iPad? What I see is a lot focus and drive to make something excellent. It seems improbable that Steve just happened to get lucky for 4 decades across multiple businesses and products but if you want to argue that Steve was an idiot who had no talent or skills I'm more than willing to hear you out.
2) Again, what dominance did Android have when Schmidt was dropped from the board? What dominance do they even have now in terms of a business model that matches Apple's? Remember Apple makes a complete product and I don't see the Nexus HW with Android even coming close to selling in volume of what Apple sells? Is there even an Android-based OEM that sells as smartphones or tablets of a single model in volumes or as quickly as Apple can… or are you just trying to paint a picture that a freely distributed OS is somehow on par with the iPhone and iPad products?
Opposing views are one thing. Outright lies are another.
I completely understand the difference. Here's an example:
Apple was recently found to infringe on patents owned by VirnetX. If they insisted on an injunction, refuse any infringing iPhones entry to the US, would that acceptable to you? Apple is illegally using patented tech not licensed to them and continues to do so with no complete workaround yet. Is that enough to warrant removal of the infringing devices from the market if the patent holder asks for it pending a settlement? It's only a couple of patents out of the several thousand required to sell a smartphone.
1) Explain to me the luck of Pixar. Or the iPhone? Or the Mac? Or the iPad? What I see is a lot focus and drive to make something excellent. It seems improbable that Steve just happened to get lucky for 4 decades across multiple businesses and products but if you want to argue that Steve was an idiot who had no talent or skills I'm more than willing to hear you out.
2) Again, what dominance did Android have when Schmidt was dropped from the board? What dominance do they even have now in terms of a business model that matches Apple's? Remember Apple makes a complete product and I don't see the Nexus HW with Android even coming close to selling in volume of what Apple sells? Is there even an Android-based OEM that sells as smartphones or tablets of a single model in volumes or as quickly as Apple can… or are you just trying to paint a picture that a freely distributed OS is somehow on par with the iPhone and iPad products?
What luck was their with the iPhone, or Mac or iPad? How about the luck of bring a product that people wanted. Tech experts said the iPad would be D.O.A and some said that about the iPhone as well. Luck was a factor in them being successful.
Eric Schmidt didn't resign because of Jobs feeling Android was stolen. Steve Jobs even commented on the resignation when it happened. Saying it was because of Android but because of to quote Steve Jobs ''Unfortunately, as Google enters more of Apple's core businesses, with Android and now Chrome OS, Eric's effectiveness as an Apple board member will be significantly diminished," See anything about being accused of stealing. Trying to rewrite history again.
We are not even talking about the Nexus. And the Nexus line is not aimed at the average consumer. Never has been really, with the exception of the Nexus 7 tablet, the Nexus line has always been aimed at and for developers. That is why you find top of the line hardware at a cheap price point. So they can sell unlocked phones from Google straight to the developer for 400 dollars and the developer knows they have spec wise the best specs available at the time and will not have to worry about carriers delaying OS updates. Tell you one Android based OEM that sells smartphones or tablets as quickly and in high volumes like Apple? Well yeah I can. It is the OEM i hate but Samsung has proven they can do that with the Galaxy S line of smartphones. They have proven they can sell them as quickly and in high volumes. So your statement their is false.
Can a freely disturbed OS be on par with iOS?
Well if you are talking about User experience yes. HTC has an amazing user experience. Motorola on the Moto X has an incredible user experience. As does the Nexus line. If you are talking in sales No because of course the OS on the most phones ie Android will own marketshare.
I never said trolls were bright.
Opposing views are one thing. Outright lies are another.
Only I am not lying. I am stating my views and not said one lie yet you are calling me a troll. Must be republican who can't handle truth and other view points.
What the luck?! If you think the countless cost in R&D, prototypes, etc. were all luck then you're seriously lucked in head.
What the luck?! If you think the countless cost in R&D, prototypes, etc. were all luck then you're seriously lucked in head.
No but the fact that they were successful in the market was luck. The fact the iPhone became a huge success was luck. Doesn't matter how much spent on R&D, mate. They could have released the phone and it could have been a failure. They got lucky with its success.
Groan. The samdroid vermin are out in full force.
Quote:
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?
Sounds like somebody didn't hear about the billion-dollar court judgement against Samsung for, well, copying the iPhone.
Here’s my question. We know this. MARVIN has confirmed it. Why isn’t he banned? Why aren’t all his posts deleted?
Wait, you mean they actually ban the obvious anti-Apple trolls here??? Wow, how refreshing! Looks like I'm going to enjoy this forum so much better than MacRumors, where they not only tolerate the career haters, but fluff their pillows and place a mint on them.
Groan. The samdroid vermin are out in full force.
As always.
This Web needs an enema.
All trolls should be banned. It's possible to be a troll while acting overly positive about Apple. Just read any of SudoNym's posts.
How could you choose SudoNym over Apple ][?
Can at least get your facts straight? Philips was first to market with a flat panel TV for consumers, and Benz invented the car.
Apple][ does take Apple's side blindly and to an excess (and his feelings on politics, minorities, and the poor come across to me as warped) but I at least think he's sincere in his beliefs and I do respect his passion even if I don't respect his positions.
SudoNym, on the other hand, sounds like an actual troll who is just saying whatever he thinks people that like Apple's products want to hear.
I'd much rather a person be honest enough with themselves and others to take a position they believe in over one they feel others will appreciate them having, no matter how grotesque I might think it is.
Quote:
All trolls should be banned. It's possible to be a troll while acting overly positive about Apple. Just read any of SudoNym's posts.
Being overly-positive about Apple on an Apple-related website may be annoying, but I don't know that I'd call it trolling (unless it's obviously facetious and designed to antagonize). Where else would one go to be overly-positive about Apple?
But the Google/Samsung/Whatever zealots (see HTC4LIFE) always manage to find and make camp at the Apple-oriented sites. Aren't there Google/Samsung fan sites where they can virtually high-five each other over the perceived awesomeness of their chosen brands?
Say something bad about Google, Samsung or anti-Apple trolls in general at MacRumors and they show you the door. It's become a strange world.
I completely understand the difference. Here's an example:
Apple was recently found to infringe on patents owned by VirnetX. If they insisted on an injunction, refuse any infringing iPhones entry to the US, would that acceptable to you? Apple is illegally using patented tech not licensed to them and continues to do so with no complete workaround yet. Is that enough to warrant removal of the infringing devices from the market if the patent holder asks for it pending a settlement? It's only a couple of patents out of the several thousand required to sell a smartphone.
Good example. First off, since I'm unfamiliar with the nature of the patent, let's assume it is not an essential patent and subject to FRAND.
So, Apple is doing something that VirnetX says they have covered with a patent. We don't know that what VirnetX alleges is true or not, and Apple may or may not agree that VirnetX's patent is being infringed on. VirnetX may ask for an injunction and at that hearing Apple may testify that injunction relief is premature as it has not been legally determined that VirnetX's patent is indeed being infringed. It will take a trial to make that determination.
This rather like what happened in California with the Samsung vs Apple trial. It was not until AFTER Samsung lost that Apple could realistically ask for an injunction, and even then it was denied. If you recall, even during the trial it came out that Apple tried to work with Samsung to get payment for the patent disagreement, but Samsung refused the offer.
From what little I know of the VirnetX patent, I'm not sure VirnetX tried to negotiate a settlement prior to asking for an injunction. It may be possible they don't want monetary relief, and only wants Apple to not use their IP. If the latter, then it must be determined that VirnetX is in error or not and it will take a court case to settle the litigation. (Such as was done in the California Samsung vs Apple) So, lets not assume that "Apple is illegally using patented tech not licensed to them and continues to do so with no complete workaround." Sound right?
What luck was their with the iPhone, or Mac or iPad? How about the luck of bring a product that people wanted.
LOL, so is that what we call it? Luck???
Only I am not lying. I am stating my views and not said one lie yet you are calling me a troll. Must be republican who can't handle truth and other view points.
And there it is: the completely irrelevant political card. Well-played.
1) That's how his comments read to me.
2) Personally, I don't care if one loves or hates Apple, Samsung, Google or any other company or thing so long as one is making honest arguments that support their positions. I find this forum to have an abundance of excellent debaters.