Yet so far courts have held that they don't have any intellectual property to protect, resulting in not being able to get any injuctions to stick. And to be fair, Apple has had only minor success in blocking stuff too. But the lawyers are sure making out like bandits.\
Now I'm starting to wonder - Samsung has supposedly over 100+K technology patents worldwide (+30+K granted in US alone) and recently announced that they set aside $200M for legal battle against Apple - so where is exactly all that $200M going to? Are they all defensive patents (or FRAND)?
hate to be nitpicky, but Samsung is based in Suwon, South Korea.
Oh well just a bad joke not to worry. By the way you better log on to Wikipedia and correct the page here where they say it was founded in Suwon but the HQ is now Seoul. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Electronics
If 301 ppi counts as 'retina', then the Samsung Jet S8000 had one a full year before the iPhone 4. The Jet was released in June 2009 and the display was AMOLED. I have one.
If 283 ppi counts as 'retina', then MY S8500 also pre-dates the iP4 release - by two months.
Prior art my arse.
Not if Apple has detail R&D documentation leading back years/months and those other Samsung products were tossed together weeks before their release (not saying that's how it went down). The key aspect of Apples "retina" display technology is the 4x increase in pixel density which offers the most elegant solution for backwards compatibility with non retina graphics. Specifically the same implementation I suggested, on this very forum, they should adopt many months before Gizmodo got their hands on an iPhone 4 prototype or I even knew there was a possibility of such a display being manufactured.
Way too many problems and clashes in AI's forums are due to members unable to admit they were wrong and instead just ratcheting up the insults another notch to cover for their errors.
i agree.
it has gotten worse over the past year or so. and, it's the same forum members too. there are, however, the small minority of folks that make visiting AI forums worthwhile for several minutes per day.
That guy is nothing more than a troll - didn't sign up with AI until 2012 and already has over 700 posts. He always has some little quip to try and stir the pot. I'm sure that he then sits back and gets a kick out of watching people come to Apple's defense. I have just learned to glance at the names on the left-hand side of each post and when I see certain ones, I just skip over them and disregard their posts completely. His is one of them.
not for nothing, but it is arguable that Samsung's advances in tech have done more for the smartphone industry (and many other industries) than Apple...
You can argue that Samsung Mobile takes TOO much inspiration from Apple, and I'd agree with that (though they are deviating from that trend) to act like Samsung isn't innovative is ridiculous and patently false...pun intended.
That guy is nothing more than a troll - didn't sign up with AI until 2012 and already has over 700 posts. He always has some little quip to try and stir the pot. I'm sure that he then sits back and gets a kick out of watching people come to Apple's defense. I have just learned to glance at the names on the left-hand side of each post and when I see certain ones, I just skip over them and disregard their posts completely. His is one of them.
if you pay attention to his posts he simply flips arguments made by Apple fans and uses them for other companies as if A is true B is also true in that regard.
You mean the "property" it stole from Apple in the first place? Sure it has a right to protect its ill gotten gains.
You're just repeating crap you read before in an appleinsider article or heard on an Apple keynote. You really should consider broadening your sources.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dunks
Not if Apple has detail R&D documentation leading back years/months and those other Samsung products were tossed together weeks before their release (not saying that's how it went down). The key aspect of Apples "retina" display technology is the 4x increase in pixel density which offers the most elegant solution for backwards compatibility with non retina graphics. Specifically the same implementation I suggested, on this very forum, they should adopt many months before Gizmodo got their hands on an iPhone 4 prototype or I even knew there was a possibility of such a display being manufactured.
Don't drink the kool-aid. Bumping display resolution was never anything new. Going to 4x is just a way of avoiding difficult programming and shoving the problem on a hardware supplier instead. It also takes time to put together something like a phone including potentially many rounds of prototyping especially with heat management on a densely packed display which is a huge consideration for LED given the issues with heat and color stability there. It's not something you throw together.
That SAMSUX phones look like cheap feminine grooming devices and feel inexpensively cheap. Having migrated from Android I can say that Android is a complete joke. Multiple battery pulls were the norm. Bluetooth was extremely erratic. Let's see...oh well another re-boot for my Android phone to reset the constantly failing bluetooth. Same reboots and battery pulls to enable erratic GPS Navigation. The apps blow compared to iPhone apps. They were graphically inferior when compared to the iOs version. Software upgrades????? Who the Hell knows if you'll get one or when? Everything is so fragmented that a MOTO has a completely different skin than a HTC for instance. Each manufacturer adds their own piece of crap onto the top of Android along with various BLOATWARE that can't be removed. NO THANKS!! SAMSUX cheap feeling phones combined with half-baked and fragmented Android = EPIC FAIL. Oh yeah.....My iPhone 4S just works ..... as advertised it just flat out works. Bluetooth, GPS and all!!
Apple's iPhone was the first smartphone with a touch-screen display
How about:
1992
This came out in 2003, with a similar form to modern smartphones
LG's Prada, which was announced before the iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WardC
There were many other things about the iPhone that were unique and have been 'copied' in other Android-based phones, but the multitouch touchscreen panel is the most obvious and blatant violation of Apple's patent on this technology.
Apple didn't invent the touchscreen, and has no patents for the screen itself. Apple has also been unable to assert its patents for multitouch.
Most of the innovations of Samsung are the things that you cant see with your naked eye.
That's rather a pointless comparison.
Apple's patents are all in the area of consumer electronics or related fields. Samsung's patents cover everything from consumer electronics to home appliances to heavy equipment.
Furthermore, it is pretty clear that the number of patents is not a good predictor of the level of innovation. While Apple doesn't lead the industry in number of patents, it's pretty clear that they lead the industry in innovation.
In response to Apple's new iPad, Samsung sent a response around saying that their product is better for content creation. But instead of comparing the iPad to the Tab, they used the 5" Note for comparison. Apparently, they think the Tab isn't good enough to be compared to the iPad.
So we're supposed to believe that the tiny Note is better for content creation than the new iPad because it has a stylus and can have two apps side-by-side? Ridiculous.
Apple's patents are all in the area of consumer electronics or related fields. Samsung's patents cover everything from consumer electronics to home appliances to heavy equipment.
And that isnt "innovation" in your eye? Please. Talk about double standard.
Most of Apple's "innovation" are tangible and easy to see with the naked eyes.
The innovations that Samsung and many of the top ten companies on the list are intangible (at least spacially) and not seen with the naked eye.
I still stand by meter stick that # of patents = innovations.
Patents = unique, never before seen innovations/thinking.
Therefore, the larger the number , the greater your "innovation".
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Furthermore, it is pretty clear that the number of patents is not a good predictor of the level of innovation. While Apple doesn't lead the industry in number of patents, it's pretty clear that they lead the industry in innovation.
Read that statement again. You havent raised a decent argument with that statement. What is "pretty clear"? Nothing "clear" to me. Where do you see this "clear" thing?
What yardstick do YOU use to compare Apple's innovation vs Samsung's innovation?
Is the "innovation" you speak of, taking others investment, aggregating it into one product and branding it with a catchy name with an even catchier marketing plan?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
So we're supposed to believe that the tiny Note is better for content creation than the new iPad because it has a stylus and can have two apps side-by-side? Ridiculous.
From a content CREATION point of view, Apple's iPad doesnt have much in multi tasking or new forms of input. The ability to truly multitask is something that would improve productivity tremendously. Dont know if you even work in a cubicle but 2 is always better than one. As an example, our office has upgraded from single monitor to a dual monitor for multitasking. Our productivity has improved some 20% just from the new installation. New forms of input? Why not? Not everyone is good with their fingers.
Answer me this: What makes the iPad better at content creation? What attribute about it does it trump the Galaxy Note?
In response to Apple's new iPad, Samsung sent a response around saying that their product is better for content creation. But instead of comparing the iPad to the Tab, they used the 5" Note for comparison. Apparently, they think the Tab isn't good enough to be compared to the iPad.
So we're supposed to believe that the tiny Note is better for content creation than the new iPad because it has a stylus and can have two apps side-by-side? Ridiculous.
They'e comparing the new iPad to the Galaxy Note 10.1 tablet, not the over-sized Note smartphone. Yes, the name can make it confusing.
Comments
Yet so far courts have held that they don't have any intellectual property to protect, resulting in not being able to get any injuctions to stick. And to be fair, Apple has had only minor success in blocking stuff too. But the lawyers are sure making out like bandits.
Now I'm starting to wonder - Samsung has supposedly over 100+K technology patents worldwide (+30+K granted in US alone) and recently announced that they set aside $200M for legal battle against Apple - so where is exactly all that $200M going to? Are they all defensive patents (or FRAND)?
I would not be surprised if they are thinking of naming a product an 'iSeoul', but I'd suggest an 'r' would be better than an 'i' .
hate to be nitpicky, but Samsung is based in Suwon, South Korea.
hate to be nitpicky, but Samsung is based in Suwon, South Korea.
Oh well just a bad joke not to worry. By the way you better log on to Wikipedia and correct the page here where they say it was founded in Suwon but the HQ is now Seoul. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Electronics
If 301 ppi counts as 'retina', then the Samsung Jet S8000 had one a full year before the iPhone 4. The Jet was released in June 2009 and the display was AMOLED. I have one.
If 283 ppi counts as 'retina', then MY S8500 also pre-dates the iP4 release - by two months.
Prior art my arse.
Not if Apple has detail R&D documentation leading back years/months and those other Samsung products were tossed together weeks before their release (not saying that's how it went down). The key aspect of Apples "retina" display technology is the 4x increase in pixel density which offers the most elegant solution for backwards compatibility with non retina graphics. Specifically the same implementation I suggested, on this very forum, they should adopt many months before Gizmodo got their hands on an iPhone 4 prototype or I even knew there was a possibility of such a display being manufactured.
Way too many problems and clashes in AI's forums are due to members unable to admit they were wrong and instead just ratcheting up the insults another notch to cover for their errors.
i agree.
it has gotten worse over the past year or so. and, it's the same forum members too. there are, however, the small minority of folks that make visiting AI forums worthwhile for several minutes per day.
Are you expecting a serious answer from this guy?
That guy is nothing more than a troll - didn't sign up with AI until 2012 and already has over 700 posts. He always has some little quip to try and stir the pot. I'm sure that he then sits back and gets a kick out of watching people come to Apple's defense. I have just learned to glance at the names on the left-hand side of each post and when I see certain ones, I just skip over them and disregard their posts completely. His is one of them.
That guy is nothing more than a troll - didn't sign up with AI until 2012 and already has over 700 posts.
And, to clarify, he made a new account when we blocked his old one.
He always has some little quip to try and stir the pot.
I've noticed that recently. His old style of arguing didn't get as much attention. "Which was?" Actually having an argument.
If you can't compete,
if you can't innovate,
Sue!
you talk'ng about Apple?
And what intellectual property is that exactly?
not for nothing, but it is arguable that Samsung's advances in tech have done more for the smartphone industry (and many other industries) than Apple...
You can argue that Samsung Mobile takes TOO much inspiration from Apple, and I'd agree with that (though they are deviating from that trend) to act like Samsung isn't innovative is ridiculous and patently false...pun intended.
That guy is nothing more than a troll - didn't sign up with AI until 2012 and already has over 700 posts. He always has some little quip to try and stir the pot. I'm sure that he then sits back and gets a kick out of watching people come to Apple's defense. I have just learned to glance at the names on the left-hand side of each post and when I see certain ones, I just skip over them and disregard their posts completely. His is one of them.
if you pay attention to his posts he simply flips arguments made by Apple fans and uses them for other companies as if A is true B is also true in that regard.
he also makes Poe arguments as an Apple fan.
You mean the "property" it stole from Apple in the first place? Sure it has a right to protect its ill gotten gains.
You're just repeating crap you read before in an appleinsider article or heard on an Apple keynote. You really should consider broadening your sources.
Not if Apple has detail R&D documentation leading back years/months and those other Samsung products were tossed together weeks before their release (not saying that's how it went down). The key aspect of Apples "retina" display technology is the 4x increase in pixel density which offers the most elegant solution for backwards compatibility with non retina graphics. Specifically the same implementation I suggested, on this very forum, they should adopt many months before Gizmodo got their hands on an iPhone 4 prototype or I even knew there was a possibility of such a display being manufactured.
Don't drink the kool-aid. Bumping display resolution was never anything new. Going to 4x is just a way of avoiding difficult programming and shoving the problem on a hardware supplier instead. It also takes time to put together something like a phone including potentially many rounds of prototyping especially with heat management on a densely packed display which is a huge consideration for LED given the issues with heat and color stability there. It's not something you throw together.
They don't have a Life, they only have a Seoul.
A Seoul of the "R" variety, and their head is jammed up there good!
That SAMSUX phones look like cheap feminine grooming devices and feel inexpensively cheap. Having migrated from Android I can say that Android is a complete joke. Multiple battery pulls were the norm. Bluetooth was extremely erratic. Let's see...oh well another re-boot for my Android phone to reset the constantly failing bluetooth. Same reboots and battery pulls to enable erratic GPS Navigation. The apps blow compared to iPhone apps. They were graphically inferior when compared to the iOs version. Software upgrades????? Who the Hell knows if you'll get one or when? Everything is so fragmented that a MOTO has a completely different skin than a HTC for instance. Each manufacturer adds their own piece of crap onto the top of Android along with various BLOATWARE that can't be removed. NO THANKS!! SAMSUX cheap feeling phones combined with half-baked and fragmented Android = EPIC FAIL. Oh yeah.....My iPhone 4S just works ..... as advertised it just flat out works. Bluetooth, GPS and all!!
I guess that's what I was saying....
Did you have a Motorola? Or was it an LG?
Apple's iPhone was the first smartphone with a touch-screen display
How about:
1992
This came out in 2003, with a similar form to modern smartphones
LG's Prada, which was announced before the iPhone.
There were many other things about the iPhone that were unique and have been 'copied' in other Android-based phones, but the multitouch touchscreen panel is the most obvious and blatant violation of Apple's patent on this technology.
Apple didn't invent the touchscreen, and has no patents for the screen itself. Apple has also been unable to assert its patents for multitouch.
How about:
1992
This came out in 2003, with a similar form to modern smartphones
LG's Prada, which was announced before the iPhone.
Apple didn't invent the touchscreen, and has no patents for the screen itself. Apple has also been unable to assert its patents for multitouch.
By touch he means capacitive AND multitouch.
A resistive stylus requiring screen isn't really a TOUCH screen as you don't touch it, the stylus does.
2011
Top patent holders (aka intellectual property )
1) IBM
2) Samsung
3) Canon
4) Microsoft
5) Panasonic
6) Toshiba
.
.
.
.
39) Apple
http://ificlaims.com/index.php?page=...-announces-top
Want other records for the past 10 years?
Samsung has been on the top 10 list for the past 12 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ent_recipients
Most of the innovations of Samsung are the things that you cant see with your naked eye.
That's rather a pointless comparison.
Apple's patents are all in the area of consumer electronics or related fields. Samsung's patents cover everything from consumer electronics to home appliances to heavy equipment.
Furthermore, it is pretty clear that the number of patents is not a good predictor of the level of innovation. While Apple doesn't lead the industry in number of patents, it's pretty clear that they lead the industry in innovation.
In response to Apple's new iPad, Samsung sent a response around saying that their product is better for content creation. But instead of comparing the iPad to the Tab, they used the 5" Note for comparison. Apparently, they think the Tab isn't good enough to be compared to the iPad.
So we're supposed to believe that the tiny Note is better for content creation than the new iPad because it has a stylus and can have two apps side-by-side? Ridiculous.
That's rather a pointless comparison.
Apple's patents are all in the area of consumer electronics or related fields. Samsung's patents cover everything from consumer electronics to home appliances to heavy equipment.
And that isnt "innovation" in your eye? Please. Talk about double standard.
Most of Apple's "innovation" are tangible and easy to see with the naked eyes.
The innovations that Samsung and many of the top ten companies on the list are intangible (at least spacially) and not seen with the naked eye.
I still stand by meter stick that # of patents = innovations.
Patents = unique, never before seen innovations/thinking.
Therefore, the larger the number , the greater your "innovation".
Furthermore, it is pretty clear that the number of patents is not a good predictor of the level of innovation. While Apple doesn't lead the industry in number of patents, it's pretty clear that they lead the industry in innovation.
Read that statement again. You havent raised a decent argument with that statement. What is "pretty clear"? Nothing "clear" to me. Where do you see this "clear" thing?
What yardstick do YOU use to compare Apple's innovation vs Samsung's innovation?
Is the "innovation" you speak of, taking others investment, aggregating it into one product and branding it with a catchy name with an even catchier marketing plan?
So we're supposed to believe that the tiny Note is better for content creation than the new iPad because it has a stylus and can have two apps side-by-side? Ridiculous.
From a content CREATION point of view, Apple's iPad doesnt have much in multi tasking or new forms of input. The ability to truly multitask is something that would improve productivity tremendously. Dont know if you even work in a cubicle but 2 is always better than one. As an example, our office has upgraded from single monitor to a dual monitor for multitasking. Our productivity has improved some 20% just from the new installation. New forms of input? Why not? Not everyone is good with their fingers.
Answer me this: What makes the iPad better at content creation? What attribute about it does it trump the Galaxy Note?
Samsung is so clueless.
In response to Apple's new iPad, Samsung sent a response around saying that their product is better for content creation. But instead of comparing the iPad to the Tab, they used the 5" Note for comparison. Apparently, they think the Tab isn't good enough to be compared to the iPad.
So we're supposed to believe that the tiny Note is better for content creation than the new iPad because it has a stylus and can have two apps side-by-side? Ridiculous.
They'e comparing the new iPad to the Galaxy Note 10.1 tablet, not the over-sized Note smartphone. Yes, the name can make it confusing.
http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2012/0...son-breakdown/
They'e comparing the new iPad to the Galaxy Note 10.1 tablet, not the over-sized Note smartphone. Yes, the name can make it confusing.
http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2012/0...son-breakdown/
Sorry, one of the articles I read referred specifically to the 5" screen and showed a picture of the 5" Note.
Since they're talking about the Note 10.1, let's do a real comparison:
- Thickness - Note wins by a meagre 0.5 mm
- Screen resolution - iPad wins (2048x1536 vs 1280x800)
- Communications - Ipad wins with LTE vs HSPA+
- Camera - iPad wins with state of the art 5 MP camera vs generic 3 MP camera
- Case - iPad wins with high quality aluminum vs Note's cheap plastic
- Software - Apple's App Store is widely recognized as being far superior
- Price - iPad wins at $499 for base WiFi model vs $599 estimated price for Samsung base model
- Tech support - Apple has the best in the industry
And, of course, the Note doesn't even have a formal ship date so you can't even order one yet even if you were crazy enough to want one.
But the Note is superior because it has a stylus.