Call it concern trolling if you want. I don't give a crap. And if you think a larger screen iPhone will take the wind out of Samsung, why did it take Apple this long to build one? Why did Apple allow Samsung to get as big as it is in the mobile phone market?
The old Rogifan knew the answer to your first question there. By the way, he also would know that Apple hasn't made a larger-screened phone yet. And he never used phrases like "I don't give a crap."
Call it concern trolling if you want. I don't give a crap. And if you think a larger screen iPhone will take the wind out of Samsung, why did it take Apple this long to build one? Why did Apple allow Samsung to get as big as it is in the mobile phone market?
The old Rogifan knew the answer to your first question there. By the way, he also would know that Apple hasn't made a larger-screened phone yet. And he never used phrases like "I don't give a crap."
So what happened to him?
And he/she was certainly male on Mac 360—or at least his/her avatar was.
Edit: I would prove it, but after they dropped the forums, you could still read the old comments in the archive. Not any more, it seems.
Fair enough. Samsung could certainly either find a different way to initiate a similar function, or worst case modify the UX for the US while staying with what they had for the rest of the world. It's certainly an avoidable issue in any case. At least until the next lawsuit anyway.
By the way, nice patent claim research. You're just the kind of member AI benefits from. Thanks for the time and effort.
Samsung actually has implemented in some of there newer phones a different method directly as a result of these lawsuits already. sliding from the center of a circle to unlock.
my mind is that Apple cut off its nose to spite its face and no one is going to change that.
Now that you've revealed your gender, we won't need to change your mind; you'll do it of your own volition. " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
They're already branded that, and it hasn't prevented from doing quite nicely. Those that have played nicely are teethering on extinction. They're all losing the little market share they have.
All the more reason for Samsung to be taken to task.
You'd think Mueller would be sufficiently intelligent to grok Apple's strategy with respect to its $40/unit demand; it anchors a high value in the minds of jurors and it's sufficiently objectionable to Samsung that they would reject it out of hand, which aligns perfectly with Apple's stated goal that "everyone should just invent their own stuff." And I think Mueller's past work shows he is sufficiently intelligent, thus adding more evidence to the suspicion that he is, in some manner, accepting compensation from a biased source.
As one that has read Muellers column for years he has done and absolute Jekyll and Hyde in the last few weeks. He was always balanced. He called Apple out on things and Samsung too. I won't be reading his column anymore. With respect to what you said above, I was really surprised to see that he could not figure that one out too. Apple is asking $40 a unit because basically they don't want to license there patents.
They do not have to. There not FRAND SEP patents there private and they do not have to license them. In the price regard Samsung is worse when they ask for 2.24% of the end Apple product price for one FRAND SEP patent out of about 3000 that make up the 3G standard. A patent that was already paid for and licensed to Qualcomm for its customers in there 3G chips in the first place. Then they tried to change Qualcomms agreement and have Apple cut out of the license agreement so they could legitimately sue Apple for infringement. Lucky for Apple Qualcomm said no and defended Apple. And so did the law on that issue.
Interesting. So the defense of the patents really requires that they pursue it to the end? Is that the principle here?
I think it goes to showing a pattern of serial infringement that will be damaging to Samsung in the end. They have already been convicted in the first trial and in the second adjustment trial to the damages money, they admitted they were in fact infringing illegally on Apples patents. The question is does Apple have the constitution to see it through to the bitter end. And will the courts eventually after all appeals and legal means are exhausted side with Apple or the serial infringer Samsung.
So basically smartphones before the iPhone looked like Blackberry's and after looked like the candy bar style phones we have today, plus the android app drawer screen is not the same as the home screen.
Don't get wrong, Samsung was obsessed with cloning the iPhone just like before it they were obsessed with cloning Blackberry. Samsung is the prime example of a fast follower and they mimic a lot of their competitors. Look at the vacuum cleaner that mirrors one from Dyson. Of course Dyson sued but then ended up withdrawing the suit. I'm not arguing whether Samsung copied or not, but whether all of this is worth it in the end for Apple. People here say Samsung needs to be publicly shamed. OK well Apple won the previous trial but I don't see where Samsung felt any shame or the public thinks of them in a more negative way. Do you have any links or examples of how this trial is really hurting Samsung?
Criminals don't have any shame they only care what they can get away with. Look at Samsungs CEO who was just issued and Indian arrest warrant for failure to pay a 4 year old 3 million dollar debt in India.
Look at Samsungs CEO who was just issued and Indian arrest warrant for failure to pay a 4 year old 3 million dollar debt in India.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You’re not making this up! Oh dear heavens, send the Indian Mafia after him! Samsung will make themselves a pariah in every country on Earth!
As one that has read Muellers column for years he has done and absolute Jekyll and Hyde in the last few weeks. He was always balanced. He called Apple out on things and Samsung too. I won't be reading his column anymore. With respect to what you said above, I was really surprised to see that he could not figure that one out too. Apple is asking $40 a unit because basically they don't want to license there patents.
They do not have to. There not FRAND SEP patents there private and they do not have to license them. In the price regard Samsung is worse when they ask for 2.24% of the end Apple product price for one FRAND SEP patent out of about 3000 that make up the 3G standard. A patent that was already paid for and licensed to Qualcomm for its customers in there 3G chips in the first place. Then they tried to change Qualcomms agreement and have Apple cut out of the license agreement so they could legitimately sue Apple for infringement. Lucky for Apple Qualcomm said no and defended Apple. And so did the law on that issue.
I agree. He went off the tracks. On top of that, he bought into the marketshare myth in the same post.
Regardless of whether Apple wins or not, I think that the drawn-out nature of the proceedings has exposed a severe weakness in American justice.
The fact that Apple have to go to court for multiple cases because there are too many patents infringed is patently absurd. The judge should take the initiative and make special arrangements for the exceptional nature of the infringements. This arbitrary limit of five patents per case, or whatever the number is, is not going to result in justice being served. Money should not be an obstacle. The call upon the jury's time seems the most problematic. Nonetheless, a solution should be found, be it an extended length of time or multiple juries. And the length of time it is taking for Apple to find justice is outrageous. Already, the inordinately long time that has passed since Samsung were first found guilty is an appalling travesty of justice, in view of the complete lack of compensation that Apple has so far received.
If the United States seeks to be seen as a fount of democracy in the eyes of the world, it needs to reform its judicial system with as much speed as is seemly. Right now, the most successful company in the world is being spat on by its own government.
I want to know what you apple people think about this entire patent trial. Do you think Samsung is wrong to steal something patented, but it ok for Apple to steal something that's not? Should you be able to patent these type of things?
"You Apple people", really? What other segments of society do you refer to in that way? I don't even want to think about it.
The patent is for the human interface not the actual code to accomplish it. If you look at all of Apple's patent applications this is the case. They are patenting a solution to a problem using a human interface function or technology that is used in a unique way. Some may argue that the patents for the human interface shouldn't be valid. Remember though that Apple spent years working on the iPhone and it was not the first smart phone but it was the first to have get rid of the physical keyboard and go completely touchscreen. It had two hardware buttons. Once Google found out about it (it doesn't help when one of their top executives sits on your board) they had to completely change course with Android. Steve Jobs knew that so he patented everything about the iPhone he could. Why, he was betting the future of the company on this product category. It was the key to Apple's growth and if it failed it could have killed Apple.
It's not feasible to go after Google for patent infringement on Android. That's what Jobs really wanted to do. Since they give it away and hide any revenue stream there is no basis for law suites. That's why Apple has targeted handset manufacturers. Almost all pay royalties. Samsung is big, has a lot of money, has expensive lawyers and dragged this out so that they had time to phase out the offending products. Here are some of the issues that pushed it to this point though: 1) Samsung was blatant in their use of Apple patented human interface features and even documented internally as being superior. 2) Apple considers some features of iOS as completely proprietary and has never offered them as FRAND or negotiations with Samsung weren't resolved. 3) Samsung holds some vital wireless FRAND patents that they have violated the spirit of FRAND by charging some manufacturers multiple times the licensing fees of others in order to gain a competitive advantage. Apple is one of those. In fact at one point Samsung refused to license a particular FRAND patent that would have prohibited Apple from importing older iPhones and iPads last year. The White House stepped in at the last minute and overturned it.
It's amazing that Samsung and Apple can maintain a relationship at the component manufacturing level. I think Samsung even started production the A7 64 bit processor. There must be very good firewalls between the Samsung divisions.
Has Apple copied ideas for iOS features from Android? Absolutely! And they are really good ones. Us Apple people are grateful for them. Android is an open system and Google doesn't patent a lot of features. Apple also gets ideas from the iOS jailbreak community and feature requests sent to them from users as well as focus group input. That doesn't mean they don't keep innovating with their own features. iOS 7/7.1 was a complete change as far as design and interface. iOS 8 is going to bring some great feature enhancements to take advantage of the newer hardware and from what I've heard you Android people will have a harder time bashing Apple Maps and Siri.
Something that good that has come from Apple's defense of their patents is that it has pushed Google and Samsung to innovate. Android and the newest Samsung products are pushing mobile technology forward with new innovative features. Samsung's new S5 has some interesting new hardware. The camera looks to be leading edge tech I will hold off on the fingerprint scanner. So far I haven't read good things other than the PayPal integration. Once it gets released user reaction is what counts. My iPhone 5S Touch ID works at all angles about 97% of the time first time with the iOS 7.1 update. The other 3% I think is user error because I didn't hold my finger long enough.
Yes, I'm an one of those Apple people. And unapologetic about it.
The fact that Apple have to go to court for multiple cases because there are too many patents infringed is patently absurd.
The judge should take the initiative and make special arrangements for the exceptional nature of the infringements.
Or, you know, not pretend that “he killed ten people but let’s only try him for two murders” is legally valid.
Already, the inordinately long time that has passed since Samsung were first found guilty is an appalling travesty of justice, in view of the complete lack of compensation that Apple has so far received.
As to why Apple hasn't built a phat phone to date, Tim Cook has already spelled it out; the answer in in the public domain. As to why Apple "allowed" Samsung to get as big in the market?
Apple is in it for the profits, of which it has captured 2/3 of in the market since the iPhone was announced. Samsung almost caught Apple last quarter but missed, and that was after massive unit sales of low and mid range phones, and some ten billion plus dollars in marketing. Think they can sustain that?
I don't, and based on their guidance, they don't either.
I've heard what Tim Cook said and none of it makes much sense to me. I just read on CNET that DisplayMate said the GS5 has the best display they've ever seen in a phone. There are larger screen phones that have just as good of battery life as the iPhone. And as long as Apple keeps the physical home button it will be difficult to make the screen bigger without making the overall device bigger. So when we get a bigger iPhone this year (which I'm 99.9% certain we will) what will the reason be? Did Ive find some magical way to make a 4.7" or 5" phone comfortable to use one handed? Or does Apple have some radical change to iOS that we don't know about? Or a display that will blow away the competition?
Basically it seems like you're saying Apple hasn't made a larger screen iPhone (until presumably this year) because it wasn't profitable enough to do so. Which is fine, but it goes against what Ive (and Cook) have said about Apple's North Star being about making the best products, not about money.
[quote]"Unintentional unlock occurs because the sliding action works on any part of the screen," Samsung said of its own copy of Slide to Unlock, noting than on Apple's iPhone, "lock undone only when sliding action is applied to a specific button."[/quote]
How ironic is it that Apple has now made the slide to unlock work on the entire screen rather than a button.
Comments
The old Rogifan knew the answer to your first question there. By the way, he also would know that Apple hasn't made a larger-screened phone yet. And he never used phrases like "I don't give a crap."
So what happened to him?
And he/she was certainly male on Mac 360—or at least his/her avatar was.
Edit: I would prove it, but after they dropped the forums, you could still read the old comments in the archive. Not any more, it seems.
Fair enough. Samsung could certainly either find a different way to initiate a similar function, or worst case modify the UX for the US while staying with what they had for the rest of the world. It's certainly an avoidable issue in any case. At least until the next lawsuit anyway.
By the way, nice patent claim research. You're just the kind of member AI benefits from. Thanks for the time and effort.
Samsung actually has implemented in some of there newer phones a different method directly as a result of these lawsuits already. sliding from the center of a circle to unlock.
I seem to remember a guy in a baseball cap, but that doesn't mean much these days.
my mind is that Apple cut off its nose to spite its face and no one is going to change that.
Now that you've revealed your gender, we won't need to change your mind; you'll do it of your own volition.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
They're already branded that, and it hasn't prevented from doing quite nicely. Those that have played nicely are teethering on extinction. They're all losing the little market share they have.
All the more reason for Samsung to be taken to task.
You can buy phone of the contract which saves you pennies upfront
People buy reconditioned
Some people by secondhand
And everybody likes a little bit of luxury sometimes
Even some people overstretch themselves
I'm working class so when I buy Apple products I have two type my belt and make sacrifices even doing a little bit of overtime
The only reason I have Apple shares because I had a near fatal accident which I got a payout .
I had a near fatal accident too a few years ago. Glad to see you had the good sense to buy Apple.
You'd think Mueller would be sufficiently intelligent to grok Apple's strategy with respect to its $40/unit demand; it anchors a high value in the minds of jurors and it's sufficiently objectionable to Samsung that they would reject it out of hand, which aligns perfectly with Apple's stated goal that "everyone should just invent their own stuff." And I think Mueller's past work shows he is sufficiently intelligent, thus adding more evidence to the suspicion that he is, in some manner, accepting compensation from a biased source.
As one that has read Muellers column for years he has done and absolute Jekyll and Hyde in the last few weeks. He was always balanced. He called Apple out on things and Samsung too. I won't be reading his column anymore. With respect to what you said above, I was really surprised to see that he could not figure that one out too. Apple is asking $40 a unit because basically they don't want to license there patents.
They do not have to. There not FRAND SEP patents there private and they do not have to license them. In the price regard Samsung is worse when they ask for 2.24% of the end Apple product price for one FRAND SEP patent out of about 3000 that make up the 3G standard. A patent that was already paid for and licensed to Qualcomm for its customers in there 3G chips in the first place. Then they tried to change Qualcomms agreement and have Apple cut out of the license agreement so they could legitimately sue Apple for infringement. Lucky for Apple Qualcomm said no and defended Apple. And so did the law on that issue.
Interesting. So the defense of the patents really requires that they pursue it to the end? Is that the principle here?
I think it goes to showing a pattern of serial infringement that will be damaging to Samsung in the end. They have already been convicted in the first trial and in the second adjustment trial to the damages money, they admitted they were in fact infringing illegally on Apples patents. The question is does Apple have the constitution to see it through to the bitter end. And will the courts eventually after all appeals and legal means are exhausted side with Apple or the serial infringer Samsung.
So basically smartphones before the iPhone looked like Blackberry's and after looked like the candy bar style phones we have today, plus the android app drawer screen is not the same as the home screen.
Don't get wrong, Samsung was obsessed with cloning the iPhone just like before it they were obsessed with cloning Blackberry. Samsung is the prime example of a fast follower and they mimic a lot of their competitors. Look at the vacuum cleaner that mirrors one from Dyson. Of course Dyson sued but then ended up withdrawing the suit. I'm not arguing whether Samsung copied or not, but whether all of this is worth it in the end for Apple. People here say Samsung needs to be publicly shamed. OK well Apple won the previous trial but I don't see where Samsung felt any shame or the public thinks of them in a more negative way. Do you have any links or examples of how this trial is really hurting Samsung?
Criminals don't have any shame they only care what they can get away with. Look at Samsungs CEO who was just issued and Indian arrest warrant for failure to pay a 4 year old 3 million dollar debt in India.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You’re not making this up! Oh dear heavens, send the Indian Mafia after him! Samsung will make themselves a pariah in every country on Earth!
As one that has read Muellers column for years he has done and absolute Jekyll and Hyde in the last few weeks. He was always balanced. He called Apple out on things and Samsung too. I won't be reading his column anymore. With respect to what you said above, I was really surprised to see that he could not figure that one out too. Apple is asking $40 a unit because basically they don't want to license there patents.
They do not have to. There not FRAND SEP patents there private and they do not have to license them. In the price regard Samsung is worse when they ask for 2.24% of the end Apple product price for one FRAND SEP patent out of about 3000 that make up the 3G standard. A patent that was already paid for and licensed to Qualcomm for its customers in there 3G chips in the first place. Then they tried to change Qualcomms agreement and have Apple cut out of the license agreement so they could legitimately sue Apple for infringement. Lucky for Apple Qualcomm said no and defended Apple. And so did the law on that issue.
I agree. He went off the tracks. On top of that, he bought into the marketshare myth in the same post.
Regardless of whether Apple wins or not, I think that the drawn-out nature of the proceedings has exposed a severe weakness in American justice.
The fact that Apple have to go to court for multiple cases because there are too many patents infringed is patently absurd. The judge should take the initiative and make special arrangements for the exceptional nature of the infringements. This arbitrary limit of five patents per case, or whatever the number is, is not going to result in justice being served. Money should not be an obstacle. The call upon the jury's time seems the most problematic. Nonetheless, a solution should be found, be it an extended length of time or multiple juries. And the length of time it is taking for Apple to find justice is outrageous. Already, the inordinately long time that has passed since Samsung were first found guilty is an appalling travesty of justice, in view of the complete lack of compensation that Apple has so far received.
If the United States seeks to be seen as a fount of democracy in the eyes of the world, it needs to reform its judicial system with as much speed as is seemly. Right now, the most successful company in the world is being spat on by its own government.
I want to know what you apple people think about this entire patent trial. Do you think Samsung is wrong to steal something patented, but it ok for Apple to steal something that's not? Should you be able to patent these type of things?
"You Apple people", really? What other segments of society do you refer to in that way? I don't even want to think about it.
The patent is for the human interface not the actual code to accomplish it. If you look at all of Apple's patent applications this is the case. They are patenting a solution to a problem using a human interface function or technology that is used in a unique way. Some may argue that the patents for the human interface shouldn't be valid. Remember though that Apple spent years working on the iPhone and it was not the first smart phone but it was the first to have get rid of the physical keyboard and go completely touchscreen. It had two hardware buttons. Once Google found out about it (it doesn't help when one of their top executives sits on your board) they had to completely change course with Android. Steve Jobs knew that so he patented everything about the iPhone he could. Why, he was betting the future of the company on this product category. It was the key to Apple's growth and if it failed it could have killed Apple.
It's not feasible to go after Google for patent infringement on Android. That's what Jobs really wanted to do. Since they give it away and hide any revenue stream there is no basis for law suites. That's why Apple has targeted handset manufacturers. Almost all pay royalties. Samsung is big, has a lot of money, has expensive lawyers and dragged this out so that they had time to phase out the offending products. Here are some of the issues that pushed it to this point though: 1) Samsung was blatant in their use of Apple patented human interface features and even documented internally as being superior. 2) Apple considers some features of iOS as completely proprietary and has never offered them as FRAND or negotiations with Samsung weren't resolved. 3) Samsung holds some vital wireless FRAND patents that they have violated the spirit of FRAND by charging some manufacturers multiple times the licensing fees of others in order to gain a competitive advantage. Apple is one of those. In fact at one point Samsung refused to license a particular FRAND patent that would have prohibited Apple from importing older iPhones and iPads last year. The White House stepped in at the last minute and overturned it.
It's amazing that Samsung and Apple can maintain a relationship at the component manufacturing level. I think Samsung even started production the A7 64 bit processor. There must be very good firewalls between the Samsung divisions.
Has Apple copied ideas for iOS features from Android? Absolutely! And they are really good ones. Us Apple people are grateful for them. Android is an open system and Google doesn't patent a lot of features. Apple also gets ideas from the iOS jailbreak community and feature requests sent to them from users as well as focus group input. That doesn't mean they don't keep innovating with their own features. iOS 7/7.1 was a complete change as far as design and interface. iOS 8 is going to bring some great feature enhancements to take advantage of the newer hardware and from what I've heard you Android people will have a harder time bashing Apple Maps and Siri.
Something that good that has come from Apple's defense of their patents is that it has pushed Google and Samsung to innovate. Android and the newest Samsung products are pushing mobile technology forward with new innovative features. Samsung's new S5 has some interesting new hardware. The camera looks to be leading edge tech I will hold off on the fingerprint scanner. So far I haven't read good things other than the PayPal integration. Once it gets released user reaction is what counts. My iPhone 5S Touch ID works at all angles about 97% of the time first time with the iOS 7.1 update. The other 3% I think is user error because I didn't hold my finger long enough.
Yes, I'm an one of those Apple people. And unapologetic about it.
The fact that Apple have to go to court for multiple cases because there are too many patents infringed is patently absurd.
Or, you know, not pretend that “he killed ten people but let’s only try him for two murders” is legally valid.
Quoting again.
Wait until you read some of Apple ]['s comments. 'You people' is tame.
Basically it seems like you're saying Apple hasn't made a larger screen iPhone (until presumably this year) because it wasn't profitable enough to do so. Which is fine, but it goes against what Ive (and Cook) have said about Apple's North Star being about making the best products, not about money.
How ironic is it that Apple has now made the slide to unlock work on the entire screen rather than a button.
As will Apple when Jony is telling us how a 5" phone is exactly the right size and can be comfortably used it with one hand.
You do realise the smileys are men-only; there are no bows.