It's because Samesung has a history of aping. Apple has a history of innovating.
I'd put in other words: Apple has an history of making truly enjoyable devices, while Samsung has an history of putting gimmicks in their device to try to be Apple....
The Note 4 introduced in October 2014 has a 64 bit Exynos 5433 processor, but it is run in 32 bit mode.
Are you really defending those ridiculous "20 cores, 5 GHz" CPUs struggling to compete with a dual core 1.4 GHz good architecture ?
You must be a Samsung enthusiast......
Instead of quarelling about whos aping who you should dig into the reality of it.
If you google on Fingerprint Cards, you will see that they have been selling a touch sensor to all of the chinese banks for 10 years.
Thats a bigger one called area sensor, and is used by bank officials to log onto their working systems.
The basic patent on the silicon chips is from 1981.
During last ten years a lot of fingerprint scanning techniques have been sorted out by the market due to low quality.
Still he opticál reader is used where you dont need a very high security level. This is just lika taking a photo of the fingerprint (remember the german politician?) .
Apples, Samsungs and Fingerprint Cards design is what you could compare between a photo and a radar scanning.
The silicon design sends a low capacitance signal into the living flesh of your finger and reads it when it reflects. This way you lika a radar can read the print even if their is a thick fog / much dirt . It does read under the dead outer skin, and also records lockal temperature variations in the finger. AND it reads also the valleys of the fingerprints so you can set definitions of the depth variations, the pictures are almost like a landscape.
What Apple does is very important because they are the big trendsetter, and they started off the real biometric trend.
But one year before Iphone 5 was revealed with a scanner, Fingerprint Cards were approached by Microsoft. They were in need of better security solutions and had for awhile studied different techniques, and had very specific opinion on wheteher to use swipe och touch fingerprint sensors. Therefore they initiated the work at FPC on the touch fingerprint sensor essentially by scaling down the area sensor FPC were selling to the chinese.
So there are essentially three companies that have this techique, but with different patents. This patent question was discussed by US pat office one year ago, and the resolution was that there is no conflict between the different patents. The three companies are : Authentec now part of Apple, Validity now part of Synaptics, and the swedish Fingerprint Cards. The Validity patent differs most from the others because it is based on thin film with silicon islands. The patents of Authentec and Fingerprint Cards are based on solid silicon. This is also why Samsung has had so much problem last year with their fingerprint scanners. The thin film islands does not register fully as the others, and also bring produktion problems.
One thing more - it is possible to set different levels of security on the sensors. When Apple released the Iphone 5 they used a lower lever for several reasons one is to speed up the identification. But this low level made the ID be more like the optical scanners, thats why the german hackers could outsmart it. When they develop and can set a higher level this can no way be done .
So, if Apple has been working on the iPhone since at least 2005, what are the odds that there are hundreds of prototype designs, many that are "phat" that have never seen the light of day? How can you copy something from someone else when you have already developed it many times over? Apple calls it "a thousand no's for every yes" but Samsung's would be "if there's a wall, we'll throw something against it".
So Apple's the only company that is prototyping stuff behind the scenes? Everyone else is sitting there twiddling their thumbs until the hear an Apple rumor and then they rush to the copy machines?
So, if Apple has been working on the iPhone since at least 2005, what are the odds that there are hundreds of prototype designs, many that are "phat" that have never seen the light of day? How can you copy something from someone else when you have already developed it many times over? Apple calls it "a thousand no's for every yes" but Samsung's would be "if there's a wall, we'll throw something against it".
So Apple's the only company that is prototyping stuff behind the scenes? Everyone else is sitting there twiddling their thumbs until the hear an Apple rumor and then they rush to the copy machines?
In the specific case of the Apple Watch, that's EXACTLY what happened. But not in this one.
To begin with, Apple will only release their latest tech when they have bled the previous tech for all its worth. Fact is that even with all the pundits and armchair CEOs screaming for a phablet, Apple was still making big money with the smaller phone. I think it was pretty obvious that they would wait until they were ready to enter the Chinese market.
The other reason is that Apple's strategy is not to be the first to the market. They prefer to watch others flounder and then learn from their mistakes.
I agree with everything you said here except I don't think the competition was/is floundering. And I don't think the 6 and 6 Plus were Apple waiting to jump in until they could do it better. I think there's lots of reasons the iPhone is better than the competition but I'm not sure what about the 6/6 Plus specifically makes them better large screen devices than their competitors. Below is an LG G3 and an iPhone 6 Plus. Both devices have a 5.5" display yet the 6 Plus has a much larger overall footprint. How is the 6 Plus a better implementation of the 'phablet' than the G3? I'll ask the same question with the iPhone 6 compared to the Moto X. The iPhone 6 is almost as tall as the Moto X even though the Moto X has a 5.2" display compared to the iPhone's 4.7" display.
To me a better implementation would have been to not ship a large screen device until Apple could figure out what to do with the home button/Touch ID so they could reduce the bezels and keep the overall device from getting much larger. But of course that wasn't going to happen as there's no way Apple could go another yesr without a larger screened iPhone.
In the specific case of the Apple Watch, that's EXACTLY what happened. But not in this one.
And you know this how? The smart watch idea has been around for quite some time.
Because several companies rushed devices to market between the time the rumors tilted to "likely" and when Apple Watch was announced. The tech press at the time was quite clear about the sequence - just go back and look at August/September articles.
Because several companies rushed devices to market between the time the rumors tilted to "likely" and when Apple Watch was announced. The tech press at the time was quite clear about the sequence - just go back and look at August/September articles.
In early 2010, Samsung released Bada. It had a drop down notification pane with quick toggles for bluetooth, WiFi, silent mode. It had copy- paste, multi-tasking, WiFi hotspot and tethering. iOS and the iPhone 4 had none of these things until November that year.
Apple didn't develop or invent the fingerprint sensor tech, they bought an Israeli company, PrimeSense, that had done so, but magically, it becomes an Apple 'innovation'.
Apple didn't innovate with retina screens either - Samsung had a 301 ppi screen in their S8000 Jet in June 2009.
Apple is extremely good at spotting great Ideas and making them theirs.
As for copy and paste -- it wasn't a matter of inventing the idea, it was a matter of getting to implement it in a good way. Surely it was on the list from day 1, since you know, the original Mac had it in 1984.
Also, claiming acquisitions isn't innovation is moving the goalposts. You'd have to them discredit every other Google acquisition, including android itself.
Because several companies rushed devices to market between the time the rumors tilted to "likely" and when Apple Watch was announced. The tech press at the time was quite clear about the sequence - just go back and look at August/September articles.
I agree with everything you said here except I don't think the competition was/is floundering. And I don't think the 6 and 6 Plus were Apple waiting to jump in until they could do it better. I think there's lots of reasons the iPhone is better than the competition but I'm not sure what about the 6/6 Plus specifically makes them better large screen devices than their competitors. Below is an LG G3 and an iPhone 6 Plus. Both devices have a 5.5" display yet the 6 Plus has a much larger overall footprint. How is the 6 Plus a better implementation of the 'phablet' than the G3? I'll ask the same question with the iPhone 6 compared to the Moto X. The iPhone 6 is almost as tall as the Moto X even though the Moto X has a 5.2" display compared to the iPhone's 4.7" display.
To me a better implementation would have been to not ship a large screen device until Apple could figure out what to do with the home button/Touch ID so they could reduce the bezels and keep the overall device from getting much larger. But of course that wasn't going to happen as there's no way Apple could go another yesr without a larger screened iPhone.
The market has decided that as a premium / flagship device, iPhone 6 / 6 Plus is better.
Now that Apple has "copied" Samsung's big screen, what does Samsung have left to compete with in the market?
Well the consumer made one touch finger print sensors popular. Why wouldn't Samsung and others try to implement something similar? If they violate specific Apple/Authentec patents then Apple sues.
Look I hate Samsung as much as anyone. I don't own any Samsung products. But it's hard to deny they were the ones who made large screen phones popular.
A shirt comes in different sizes -- is the shirt company innovative for releasing it in "extra large"? Are other shirt companies "aping" it (which implies a hamfisted approach that lacks understanding, thus the term ape) when they release their own shirts in extra large? Nope.
Show me a press report in which the other smart watch makers say that they're making a smart watch because Apple is rumored to be developing one.
You are aware that the Swiss mechanical watch makers are now talking about "smart" watches after Apple's preview of the Apple Watch, and usually in response to a question about how they will compete with the Apple Watch. I don't follow the other smart watch makers so I don't really know what they are up to, but to deny that Apple is influencing the market pretty laughable.
Where is Apple's 4K Cinema Display? Dell, HP and Samsung all have curved monitors on the market or coming soon. Where is Apple's? Curved TVs are gimmicky but curved monitors are very cool. Why is Apple late to that party?
Well the original Microsoft Surface was bigger than an iPad so I guess everyone copied Microsoft.
Maybe you don't remember the iPad critcism - "it's just a big iPhone!" The implication being size alone was not innovation. They were wrong of course, since it was more than size. But Apple did "large" iPhones before Samsung. They even planned on the iPad before the iPhone but changed course.
Comments
I'd put in other words: Apple has an history of making truly enjoyable devices, while Samsung has an history of putting gimmicks in their device to try to be Apple....
Are you really defending those ridiculous "20 cores, 5 GHz" CPUs struggling to compete with a dual core 1.4 GHz good architecture ?
You must be a Samsung enthusiast......
I'd suggest a little research on MR forums about him.
The picture would be clear.
Hi!
Instead of quarelling about whos aping who you should dig into the reality of it.
If you google on Fingerprint Cards, you will see that they have been selling a touch sensor to all of the chinese banks for 10 years.
Thats a bigger one called area sensor, and is used by bank officials to log onto their working systems.
The basic patent on the silicon chips is from 1981.
During last ten years a lot of fingerprint scanning techniques have been sorted out by the market due to low quality.
Still he opticál reader is used where you dont need a very high security level. This is just lika taking a photo of the fingerprint (remember the german politician?) .
Apples, Samsungs and Fingerprint Cards design is what you could compare between a photo and a radar scanning.
The silicon design sends a low capacitance signal into the living flesh of your finger and reads it when it reflects. This way you lika a radar can read the print even if their is a thick fog / much dirt . It does read under the dead outer skin, and also records lockal temperature variations in the finger. AND it reads also the valleys of the fingerprints so you can set definitions of the depth variations, the pictures are almost like a landscape.
What Apple does is very important because they are the big trendsetter, and they started off the real biometric trend.
But one year before Iphone 5 was revealed with a scanner, Fingerprint Cards were approached by Microsoft. They were in need of better security solutions and had for awhile studied different techniques, and had very specific opinion on wheteher to use swipe och touch fingerprint sensors. Therefore they initiated the work at FPC on the touch fingerprint sensor essentially by scaling down the area sensor FPC were selling to the chinese.
So there are essentially three companies that have this techique, but with different patents. This patent question was discussed by US pat office one year ago, and the resolution was that there is no conflict between the different patents. The three companies are : Authentec now part of Apple, Validity now part of Synaptics, and the swedish Fingerprint Cards. The Validity patent differs most from the others because it is based on thin film with silicon islands. The patents of Authentec and Fingerprint Cards are based on solid silicon. This is also why Samsung has had so much problem last year with their fingerprint scanners. The thin film islands does not register fully as the others, and also bring produktion problems.
One thing more - it is possible to set different levels of security on the sensors. When Apple released the Iphone 5 they used a lower lever for several reasons one is to speed up the identification. But this low level made the ID be more like the optical scanners, thats why the german hackers could outsmart it. When they develop and can set a higher level this can no way be done .
So Apple's the only company that is prototyping stuff behind the scenes? Everyone else is sitting there twiddling their thumbs until the hear an Apple rumor and then they rush to the copy machines?
So, if Apple has been working on the iPhone since at least 2005, what are the odds that there are hundreds of prototype designs, many that are "phat" that have never seen the light of day? How can you copy something from someone else when you have already developed it many times over? Apple calls it "a thousand no's for every yes" but Samsung's would be "if there's a wall, we'll throw something against it".
So Apple's the only company that is prototyping stuff behind the scenes? Everyone else is sitting there twiddling their thumbs until the hear an Apple rumor and then they rush to the copy machines?
In the specific case of the Apple Watch, that's EXACTLY what happened. But not in this one.
And you know this how? The smart watch idea has been around for quite some time.
http://www.techradar.com/news/portable-devices/other-devices/before-iwatch-the-timely-history-of-the-smartwatch-1176685
I agree with everything you said here except I don't think the competition was/is floundering. And I don't think the 6 and 6 Plus were Apple waiting to jump in until they could do it better. I think there's lots of reasons the iPhone is better than the competition but I'm not sure what about the 6/6 Plus specifically makes them better large screen devices than their competitors. Below is an LG G3 and an iPhone 6 Plus. Both devices have a 5.5" display yet the 6 Plus has a much larger overall footprint. How is the 6 Plus a better implementation of the 'phablet' than the G3? I'll ask the same question with the iPhone 6 compared to the Moto X. The iPhone 6 is almost as tall as the Moto X even though the Moto X has a 5.2" display compared to the iPhone's 4.7" display.
To me a better implementation would have been to not ship a large screen device until Apple could figure out what to do with the home button/Touch ID so they could reduce the bezels and keep the overall device from getting much larger. But of course that wasn't going to happen as there's no way Apple could go another yesr without a larger screened iPhone.
Then why did they, because they wanted to, or because they had to?
In the specific case of the Apple Watch, that's EXACTLY what happened. But not in this one.
And you know this how? The smart watch idea has been around for quite some time.
Because several companies rushed devices to market between the time the rumors tilted to "likely" and when Apple Watch was announced. The tech press at the time was quite clear about the sequence - just go back and look at August/September articles.
So you're guessing on perception?
As for copy and paste -- it wasn't a matter of inventing the idea, it was a matter of getting to implement it in a good way. Surely it was on the list from day 1, since you know, the original Mac had it in 1984.
Also, claiming acquisitions isn't innovation is moving the goalposts. You'd have to them discredit every other Google acquisition, including android itself.
Implementing a 64-bit OS is a mandatory part of the innovation. Next.
Because several companies rushed devices to market between the time the rumors tilted to "likely" and when Apple Watch was announced. The tech press at the time was quite clear about the sequence - just go back and look at August/September articles.
So you're guessing on perception?
No. On press reports.
Show me a press report in which the other smart watch makers say that they're making a smart watch because Apple is rumored to be developing one.
I agree with everything you said here except I don't think the competition was/is floundering. And I don't think the 6 and 6 Plus were Apple waiting to jump in until they could do it better. I think there's lots of reasons the iPhone is better than the competition but I'm not sure what about the 6/6 Plus specifically makes them better large screen devices than their competitors. Below is an LG G3 and an iPhone 6 Plus. Both devices have a 5.5" display yet the 6 Plus has a much larger overall footprint. How is the 6 Plus a better implementation of the 'phablet' than the G3? I'll ask the same question with the iPhone 6 compared to the Moto X. The iPhone 6 is almost as tall as the Moto X even though the Moto X has a 5.2" display compared to the iPhone's 4.7" display.
To me a better implementation would have been to not ship a large screen device until Apple could figure out what to do with the home button/Touch ID so they could reduce the bezels and keep the overall device from getting much larger. But of course that wasn't going to happen as there's no way Apple could go another yesr without a larger screened iPhone.
The market has decided that as a premium / flagship device, iPhone 6 / 6 Plus is better.
Now that Apple has "copied" Samsung's big screen, what does Samsung have left to compete with in the market?
IoT?
A shirt comes in different sizes -- is the shirt company innovative for releasing it in "extra large"? Are other shirt companies "aping" it (which implies a hamfisted approach that lacks understanding, thus the term ape) when they release their own shirts in extra large? Nope.
Show me a press report in which the other smart watch makers say that they're making a smart watch because Apple is rumored to be developing one.
You are aware that the Swiss mechanical watch makers are now talking about "smart" watches after Apple's preview of the Apple Watch, and usually in response to a question about how they will compete with the Apple Watch. I don't follow the other smart watch makers so I don't really know what they are up to, but to deny that Apple is influencing the market pretty laughable.
Nonsense. Gimmick.
Maybe you don't remember the iPad critcism - "it's just a big iPhone!" The implication being size alone was not innovation. They were wrong of course, since it was more than size. But Apple did "large" iPhones before Samsung. They even planned on the iPad before the iPhone but changed course.
No. On press reports.
Show me a press report in which the other smart watch makers say that they're making a smart watch because Apple is rumored to be developing one.
D'oh. Do you think they will create a Press Release saying that they're copying, or rushing to market? Not even Samsung is that stupid.
But I said "press reports" and not "press releases" from makers. If you want those, here are a few I found with a couple of minutes of Google ...
With Apple's 'iWatch' around the corner, Wellograph releases sapphire smartwatch
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/09/02/with-apples-iwatch-around-the-corner-wellograph-releases-sapphire-smartwatch
Pebble smartwatch gets $50 price cut, background tracking for fitness & sleep
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/09/30/pebble-smartwatch-gets-50-price-cut-background-tracking-for-fitness-sleep
First look: Metawatch's iPhone-connected Meta M1 smartwatch
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/09/08/first-look-metas-iphone-connected-m1-smartwatch
Review roundup: Motorola's Moto 360 is the best smartwatch yet, but poor battery life is unacceptable
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/09/05/review-roundup-motorolas-moto-360-is-the-best-smartwatch-yet-but-poor-battery-life-is-unacceptable
Pebble's iOS-compatible Steel smart watch hits Best Buy with leather band-only bundle
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/06/11/pebbles-ios-compatible-steel-smart-watch-hits-best-buy-with-20-discount-