I agree...they could do this direction too. There are many things they could (and should) being doing other than reporting every single damn thing Samsung does.
Keeping in mind that this particular article is an op-ed piece. It isn't really anything that Samsung is doing. This is someone's opinion. Which, in my mind, is really not necessary.
Whats even worse, is the fact that AI is constantly late in getting REAL Apple stories on their site. There are many many times when MacRumors, or 9-5 Mac has articles out that either AI is late to report, or simply never reports. I guess they're too busy worrying about the next move at Samsung so they can report on it. This is the same thing aided in killing Apple the first time.
I agree. As far as news is concerned, AI doesn't stay on top of things like other sites. I don't however, rely on this site for Apple news. AI acts like an oddly incomplete Apple news regurgitator.
You'd be better off using an RSS reader pulling feeds from several sites.
My bigger pet peeve is the lack of polish in both the writing and the site code (Huddler Tech?). Spelling and grammar issues, formatting issues (hyperlinks that are not properly closed and those sloppy curly quotes and long dash characters that are improperly translated between character sets) are just inexcusable. Never mind the fake articles that are really promotions for MacMall and other sponsors.
Its like there's this war going on where Samsung has to lose and Apple has to win. This is the same shit that went on back in the 90's where Microsoft had to lose and Apple had to win and this all started pretty much the same way with MS stealing Apple's designs and technologies for its OS (Windows 95) and getting away with it.
I'm not sure if you are saying Apple, AppleInsider, or forum members are thinking that, or if that is just how you see things.
I assume you are saying AppleInsider takes that view and this is why they keep posting about Samsung.
Why don't we just focus on Apple and ONLY report on Apple, and its 3rd party supporters (App developers, hardware developers). Samsung should only be mentioned if there's an actual reason to, like a court ruling or something like that.
I actually agree with that in principle. I would like to see better Apple coverage, and you seem to imply that if AppleInsider focused on Apple, we'd see better Apple news and less Samsung. Maybe. Keep in mind that DED basically only writes opinions, and he's pretty obsessed with certain topics. No matter what, he's not contributing to the news regurgitation desk. Oddly, I've tried to send news links to them, and they usually ignore it but sometimes post anyway without attribution. So I have given up completely on trying to make this site better. It is what it is, and we are free to leave if we don't like it. That is our only recourse.
Practical answer for you, even if's not what you want to hear.
Keeping in mind that this particular article is an op-ed piece. It isn't really anything that Samsung is doing. This is someone's opinion. Which, in my mind, is really not necessary.
It does get the clicks, though.
Whatever makes them more money! Thats all that matters.
I agree. As far as news is concerned, AI doesn't stay on top of things like other sites. I don't however, rely on this site for Apple news. AI acts like an oddly incomplete Apple news regurgitator.
You'd be better off using an RSS reader pulling feeds from several sites.
Yes, I can definitely see this every day where they're constantly missing things. I guess its whatever makes them the most money is what they'll report on. Like I said before, its the Fox News approach. Works for a while, but eventually people will lose interest.
Quote:
I assume you are saying AppleInsider takes that view and this is why they keep posting about Samsung.
I actually agree with that in principle. I would like to see better Apple coverage, and you seem to imply that if AppleInsider focused on Apple, we'd see better Apple news and less Samsung. Maybe. Keep in mind that DED basically only writes opinions, and he's pretty obsessed with certain topics. No matter what, he's not contributing to the news regurgitation desk.
Yes, I'm saying both AI and some of our forum members act like its this war between Apple and Samsung and Samsung has to lose. Whatever it takes, Samsung has to lose, even if it means Apple taking its eye off the more important things which is just being Apple.
I don't necessarily mind the DED articles. At least he puts some thought into his LONG articles, with facts, charts, and generally has pretty good views on things. I like opinions (editorials) and I wish some of the editors here would do more of that instead of just browsing the web for Samsung stories and rehashing them out.
Quote:
My bigger pet peeve is the lack of polish in both the writing and the site code (Huddler Tech?). Spelling and grammar issues, formatting issues (hyperlinks that are not properly closed and those sloppy curly quotes and long dash characters that are improperly translated between character sets) are just inexcusable. Never mind the fake articles that are really promotions for MacMall and other sponsors.
I'm not sure if you are saying Apple, AppleInsider, or forum members are thinking that, or if that is just how you see things.
I have noticed this too. Sometimes its like editors don't even read what they wrote. They just write it up quick and click publish like they get paid on how many articles in a specific amount of time (days, weeks, per month) they get out. Never mind the amount of quality work that gets put out. And yes, I hate when they post about where to find the cheapest prices on an Apple de
Quote:
Oddly, I've tried to send news links to them, and they usually ignore it but sometimes post anyway without attribution. So I have given up completely on trying to make this site better. It is what it is, and we are free to leave if we don't like it. That is our only recourse.
Practical answer for you, even if's not what you want to hear.
Yes, I know. I've already stirred up a hornets nest with this as some see that AI is doing nothing wrong and this this particular article is totally relevant to Apple News/Rumors. This alone will keep AI posting these articles. When AI sees click rates and traffic fall, maybe they'll start to think differently about their website. I was serious when I said in another thread, maybe AI should think about chaining its name to something else more generic since this seems to be what they're more interested in posting. I kinda think the Apple News/Rumor sites are plentiful as it is. Its kind of a flooded market as far as I'm concerned. There's a lot out there.
I usually enjoy your "no holds barred" writing style, but I gotta say, this far more reserved article, which let the images and story do the talking was pretty awesome.
Looking at the SIII, then S4, then S5 in that first image, you can see how Samsung went from rounded bottom and top to flat bottom with still significant rounding at the corners to iPhone-like corners with flat bottom and top edges. Any reference to their own design ethic, to my mind, gets throw right out the window at this point. Don't even need to read the rest of the article.
I hope so...I get so sick and tired of hearing about what Samsung is doing. Who really gives a shit! Why do you care to know what Samsung is doing all the time? This is AppleInsider, not Samsung Insider. If you stop giving them press, maybe people will forget about them. What they're doing is obviously working from a press standpoint. Stop paying attention to them.
Whats even worse, is the fact that AI is constantly late in getting REAL Apple stories on their site. There are many many times when MacRumors, or 9-5 Mac has articles out that either AI is late to report, or simply never reports. I guess they're too busy worrying about the next move at Samsung so they can report on it. This is the same thing aided in killing Apple the first time.
Its like there's this war going on where Samsung has to lose and Apple has to win. This is the same shit that went on back in the 90's where Microsoft had to lose and Apple had to win and this all started pretty much the same way with MS stealing Apple's designs and technologies for its OS (Windows 95) and getting away with it.
Why don't we just focus on Apple and ONLY report on Apple, and its 3rd party supporters (App developers, hardware developers). Samsung should only be mentioned if there's an actual reason to, like a court ruling or something like that.
If you don't agree with my post, please give me a NO BS answer as to how this is relevant on an Apple News/Rumor site?
Here's the NO BS answer: this topic, of Samsung presenting a rationale, as weak and amateurish as it is, for how they designed their new phone is entirely designed to be presented in court once Apple's patent infringement campaign brings suit against the S5. Samsung has learned that the way to copy Apple and get away with it is to sow confusion in the minds of the jury. One method of doing that we saw in the recent trial was to put the focus on a google. Here they are exhibiting a new method; create documents that purport to speak to Samsung's independent design ethic, even as the resultant design more and more closely mirrors Apple's. So I see Samsung creating a black-box team that goes over every detail of each New Apple design, both hardware and UX, coming up with a brief on what Samsung needs to take from that and then, out of the room they go. And then in comes the 'design team' who pour over all the findings from the black-box team and map each finding to some rationale that would come to the same conclusion. They then write up all that rationale and it's borrowed conclusions and walk out of the room with that in hand, off to the produce the next Samsung phone. Meanwhile, the cleaning crew (cleaning crew in the spirit of an organized crime network) enters the room and burns everything in sight. No trace remains of the real inspiration for the next Samsung design and therefore no evidence it was a blatant rip off of Apple's designs. It doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to see this. It's as clear as day.
In my opinion, it's not just that Samsung copies that make them an evil company, it's the total reputation they've received over the years, the TOTAL copying of iPhone, for instance, the different companies they've ripped off (Pioneer and others). Do yourself a favour and read this Vanity Fair article. If you read this and still don't mind "supporting" Samsung, I can't help you. For me, the decision to never knowingly buy anything from Samsung was easy. I could never hope to teach my children to be hardworking, law abiding citizens that would endeavour to put back into society rather than just take out, if I didn't live the words myself. To me, buying stolen property is akin to rewarding the thief. Why would I do that? Even more to the point ....if they stole from me ... would I still think it was ok?
Here's the NO BS answer: this topic, of Samsung presenting a rationale, as weak and amateurish as it is, for how they designed their new phone is entirely designed to be presented in court once Apple's patent infringement campaign brings suit against the S5. Samsung has learned that the way to copy Apple and get away with it is to sow confusion in the minds of the jury. One method of doing that we saw in the recent trial was to put the focus on a google. Here they are exhibiting a new method; create documents that purport to speak to Samsung's independent design ethic, even as the resultant design more and more closely mirrors Apple's. So I see Samsung creating a black-box team that goes over every detail of each New Apple design, both hardware and UX, coming up with a brief on what Samsung needs to take from that and then, out of the room they go. And then in comes the 'design team' who pour over all the findings from the black-box team and map each finding to some rationale that would come to the same conclusion. They then write up all that rationale and it's borrowed conclusions and walk out of the room with that in hand, off to the produce the next Samsung phone. Meanwhile, the cleaning crew (cleaning crew in the spirit of an organized crime network) enters the room and burns everything in sight. No trace remains of the real inspiration for the next Samsung design and therefore no evidence it was a blatant rip off of Apple's designs. It doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to see this. It's as clear as day.
I'm amazed that U.S. courts allow this to happen. It's like someone breaking-in to your home, stealing everything worthwhile and then facing a jury, saying they belong to us, we had them first.
I'm also amazed that after the $billions spent defending South Korea, Washington does not apply some pressure to the S Korean government genitals, indicating that pressure can and will be ratcheted up...but they won't!
I'm amazed that U.S. courts allow this to happen. It's like someone breaking-in to your home, stealing everything worthwhile and then facing a jury, saying they belong to us, we had them first.
According to the resident Samsung apologists in these forums, Apple is supposed to allow this to happen. Apple is supposed to stop litigating and work harder to give Samsung more to copy because "everyone copies," except for Samsung, who claims they are innocent of patent infringement in this last trial.
Here's the NO BS answer: this topic, of Samsung presenting a rationale, as weak and amateurish as it is, for how they designed their new phone is entirely designed to be presented in court once Apple's patent infringement campaign brings suit against the S5. Samsung has learned that the way to copy Apple and get away with it is to sow confusion in the minds of the jury. One method of doing that we saw in the recent trial was to put the focus on a google. Here they are exhibiting a new method; create documents that purport to speak to Samsung's independent design ethic, even as the resultant design more and more closely mirrors Apple's. So I see Samsung creating a black-box team that goes over every detail of each New Apple design, both hardware and UX, coming up with a brief on what Samsung needs to take from that and then, out of the room they go. And then in comes the 'design team' who pour over all the findings from the black-box team and map each finding to some rationale that would come to the same conclusion. They then write up all that rationale and it's borrowed conclusions and walk out of the room with that in hand, off to the produce the next Samsung phone. Meanwhile, the cleaning crew (cleaning crew in the spirit of an organized crime network) enters the room and burns everything in sight. No trace remains of the real inspiration for the next Samsung design and therefore no evidence it was a blatant rip off of Apple's designs. It doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to see this. It's as clear as day.
Brilliant. This explains why they are not embarrassed by the obvious non-English idiom in the language. If they showed it to their Anglo PR or advertising agency, they would have to cover their ears and duck for cover over the howlers that are in there.
This means that they did not mean this for public consumption, but rather for legal cover, as you say.
The perfidy of this company knows no bounds, which is why we have to thank DED and AI for keeping us informed of these maneuvers. Samsung (and Google) must not be allowed to trash the portable computer industry the way the desktop industry was trashed in the 80s and 90s.
Comments
I agree...they could do this direction too. There are many things they could (and should) being doing other than reporting every single damn thing Samsung does.
Keeping in mind that this particular article is an op-ed piece. It isn't really anything that Samsung is doing. This is someone's opinion. Which, in my mind, is really not necessary.
It does get the clicks, though.
This link provided by ClemyNX is actually pretty funny!
Everybody check it out!
I agree. As far as news is concerned, AI doesn't stay on top of things like other sites. I don't however, rely on this site for Apple news. AI acts like an oddly incomplete Apple news regurgitator.
You'd be better off using an RSS reader pulling feeds from several sites.
My bigger pet peeve is the lack of polish in both the writing and the site code (Huddler Tech?). Spelling and grammar issues, formatting issues (hyperlinks that are not properly closed and those sloppy curly quotes and long dash characters that are improperly translated between character sets) are just inexcusable. Never mind the fake articles that are really promotions for MacMall and other sponsors.
I'm not sure if you are saying Apple, AppleInsider, or forum members are thinking that, or if that is just how you see things.
I assume you are saying AppleInsider takes that view and this is why they keep posting about Samsung.
I actually agree with that in principle. I would like to see better Apple coverage, and you seem to imply that if AppleInsider focused on Apple, we'd see better Apple news and less Samsung. Maybe. Keep in mind that DED basically only writes opinions, and he's pretty obsessed with certain topics. No matter what, he's not contributing to the news regurgitation desk. Oddly, I've tried to send news links to them, and they usually ignore it but sometimes post anyway without attribution. So I have given up completely on trying to make this site better. It is what it is, and we are free to leave if we don't like it. That is our only recourse.
Practical answer for you, even if's not what you want to hear.
Keeping in mind that this particular article is an op-ed piece. It isn't really anything that Samsung is doing. This is someone's opinion. Which, in my mind, is really not necessary.
It does get the clicks, though.
Whatever makes them more money! Thats all that matters.
I agree. As far as news is concerned, AI doesn't stay on top of things like other sites. I don't however, rely on this site for Apple news. AI acts like an oddly incomplete Apple news regurgitator.
You'd be better off using an RSS reader pulling feeds from several sites.
Yes, I can definitely see this every day where they're constantly missing things. I guess its whatever makes them the most money is what they'll report on. Like I said before, its the Fox News approach. Works for a while, but eventually people will lose interest.
I actually agree with that in principle. I would like to see better Apple coverage, and you seem to imply that if AppleInsider focused on Apple, we'd see better Apple news and less Samsung. Maybe. Keep in mind that DED basically only writes opinions, and he's pretty obsessed with certain topics. No matter what, he's not contributing to the news regurgitation desk.
Yes, I'm saying both AI and some of our forum members act like its this war between Apple and Samsung and Samsung has to lose. Whatever it takes, Samsung has to lose, even if it means Apple taking its eye off the more important things which is just being Apple.
I don't necessarily mind the DED articles. At least he puts some thought into his LONG articles, with facts, charts, and generally has pretty good views on things. I like opinions (editorials) and I wish some of the editors here would do more of that instead of just browsing the web for Samsung stories and rehashing them out.
I'm not sure if you are saying Apple, AppleInsider, or forum members are thinking that, or if that is just how you see things.
I have noticed this too. Sometimes its like editors don't even read what they wrote. They just write it up quick and click publish like they get paid on how many articles in a specific amount of time (days, weeks, per month) they get out. Never mind the amount of quality work that gets put out. And yes, I hate when they post about where to find the cheapest prices on an Apple de
Yes, I know. I've already stirred up a hornets nest with this as some see that AI is doing nothing wrong and this this particular article is totally relevant to Apple News/Rumors. This alone will keep AI posting these articles. When AI sees click rates and traffic fall, maybe they'll start to think differently about their website. I was serious when I said in another thread, maybe AI should think about chaining its name to something else more generic since this seems to be what they're more interested in posting. I kinda think the Apple News/Rumor sites are plentiful as it is. Its kind of a flooded market as far as I'm concerned. There's a lot out there.
What a killer article by DED.
I usually enjoy your "no holds barred" writing style, but I gotta say, this far more reserved article, which let the images and story do the talking was pretty awesome.
Looking at the SIII, then S4, then S5 in that first image, you can see how Samsung went from rounded bottom and top to flat bottom with still significant rounding at the corners to iPhone-like corners with flat bottom and top edges. Any reference to their own design ethic, to my mind, gets throw right out the window at this point. Don't even need to read the rest of the article.
Here is a great blog about all Samsung original designs.
http://samsungdesign.tumblr.com/
Check it out!!
This link provided by ClemyNX is actually pretty funny!
Everybody check it out!
LOL! The archives are even more impressive.....
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Here's the NO BS answer: this topic, of Samsung presenting a rationale, as weak and amateurish as it is, for how they designed their new phone is entirely designed to be presented in court once Apple's patent infringement campaign brings suit against the S5. Samsung has learned that the way to copy Apple and get away with it is to sow confusion in the minds of the jury. One method of doing that we saw in the recent trial was to put the focus on a google. Here they are exhibiting a new method; create documents that purport to speak to Samsung's independent design ethic, even as the resultant design more and more closely mirrors Apple's. So I see Samsung creating a black-box team that goes over every detail of each New Apple design, both hardware and UX, coming up with a brief on what Samsung needs to take from that and then, out of the room they go. And then in comes the 'design team' who pour over all the findings from the black-box team and map each finding to some rationale that would come to the same conclusion. They then write up all that rationale and it's borrowed conclusions and walk out of the room with that in hand, off to the produce the next Samsung phone. Meanwhile, the cleaning crew (cleaning crew in the spirit of an organized crime network) enters the room and burns everything in sight. No trace remains of the real inspiration for the next Samsung design and therefore no evidence it was a blatant rip off of Apple's designs. It doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to see this. It's as clear as day.
Every major company copies
In my opinion, it's not just that Samsung copies that make them an evil company, it's the total reputation they've received over the years, the TOTAL copying of iPhone, for instance, the different companies they've ripped off (Pioneer and others). Do yourself a favour and read this Vanity Fair article. If you read this and still don't mind "supporting" Samsung, I can't help you. For me, the decision to never knowingly buy anything from Samsung was easy. I could never hope to teach my children to be hardworking, law abiding citizens that would endeavour to put back into society rather than just take out, if I didn't live the words myself. To me, buying stolen property is akin to rewarding the thief. Why would I do that? Even more to the point ....if they stole from me ... would I still think it was ok?
http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2014/06/apple-samsung-smartphone-patent-war
Here's the NO BS answer: this topic, of Samsung presenting a rationale, as weak and amateurish as it is, for how they designed their new phone is entirely designed to be presented in court once Apple's patent infringement campaign brings suit against the S5. Samsung has learned that the way to copy Apple and get away with it is to sow confusion in the minds of the jury. One method of doing that we saw in the recent trial was to put the focus on a google. Here they are exhibiting a new method; create documents that purport to speak to Samsung's independent design ethic, even as the resultant design more and more closely mirrors Apple's. So I see Samsung creating a black-box team that goes over every detail of each New Apple design, both hardware and UX, coming up with a brief on what Samsung needs to take from that and then, out of the room they go. And then in comes the 'design team' who pour over all the findings from the black-box team and map each finding to some rationale that would come to the same conclusion. They then write up all that rationale and it's borrowed conclusions and walk out of the room with that in hand, off to the produce the next Samsung phone. Meanwhile, the cleaning crew (cleaning crew in the spirit of an organized crime network) enters the room and burns everything in sight. No trace remains of the real inspiration for the next Samsung design and therefore no evidence it was a blatant rip off of Apple's designs. It doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to see this. It's as clear as day.
I call BS...
I'm amazed that U.S. courts allow this to happen. It's like someone breaking-in to your home, stealing everything worthwhile and then facing a jury, saying they belong to us, we had them first.
I'm also amazed that after the $billions spent defending South Korea, Washington does not apply some pressure to the S Korean government genitals, indicating that pressure can and will be ratcheted up...but they won't!
How is that an oxymoron?
According to the resident Samsung apologists in these forums, Apple is supposed to allow this to happen. Apple is supposed to stop litigating and work harder to give Samsung more to copy because "everyone copies," except for Samsung, who claims they are innocent of patent infringement in this last trial.
He's saying that Samsung neither designs nor is inspired. IOW, they copy and steal.
:no:
Trying to sound as if they understand design and failing quite badly.
Brilliant. This explains why they are not embarrassed by the obvious non-English idiom in the language. If they showed it to their Anglo PR or advertising agency, they would have to cover their ears and duck for cover over the howlers that are in there.
This means that they did not mean this for public consumption, but rather for legal cover, as you say.
The perfidy of this company knows no bounds, which is why we have to thank DED and AI for keeping us informed of these maneuvers. Samsung (and Google) must not be allowed to trash the portable computer industry the way the desktop industry was trashed in the 80s and 90s.