It's very weird. It obviously doesn't look the same as the Siri logo, but why did they decide on a microphone at all? And why pick the same kind of microphone as Apple? A phone would have some kind of telephone for a logo, a voice recording app might naturally have a microphone for a logo, but why a microphone for Siri or the Samsung app? It's not immediately obvious how a microphone relates to Siri or the Samsung app. Apple chose a microphone, that's their choice. Samsung then chooses a microphone for their app - why? And the same kind of microphone - there are many different styles of mics. It's blatant brainless copying. Wow, they changed the border, and darkened the microphone - very creative. It's funny that they made it very ugly.
That microphone icon was in use before Apple used it. Are you also going to say "Samsung’s building TVs now that Apple is"?
Remember the pre-iPhone era? History is repeating itself.
Back then PCs were the central to how people use technology. So manufacturers tried to cram what worked on PCs into smart phones, while others tried to cram PCs into tablets, and both results were terrible.
Now that smart phones are the hottest thing, people start to cram what worked on smart phones into the device of the next battle field -- TVs. "Look! You can do all those cool things that your smart phones do right on your TV! Yay! We beat Apple to it!"
I may not speak for everyone, but I do not want to use my TV as a computer or a smart phone. I do not care for FB on my TV screen, nor do I care for web browsing at 10 feet away. I want to be able to sit down and enjoy TV -- all my favorite shows, at any time I want. There are quite a few contenders in this space, but so far none has met my requirement. Whoever can make a TV that does this will get my money.
Why buy one TV that can do that when it's better to buy multiple boxes and have all your TVs do it?
Remember the pre-iPhone era? History is repeating itself.
Back then PCs were the central to how people use technology. So manufacturers tried to cram what worked on PCs into smart phones, while others tried to cram PCs into tablets, and both results were terrible.
Now that smart phones are the hottest thing, people start to cram what worked on smart phones into the device of the next battle field -- TVs. "Look! You can do all those cool things that your smart phones do right on your TV! Yay! We beat Apple to it!"
I may not speak for everyone, but I do not want to use my TV as a computer or a smart phone. I do not care for FB on my TV screen, nor do I care for web browsing at 10 feet away. I want to be able to sit down and enjoy TV -- all my favorite shows, at any time I want. There are quite a few contenders in this space, but so far none has met my requirement. Whoever can make a TV that does this will get my money.
Could not agree more, and think it is funny now that you put it into text, as to how everyone is trying to make the next thing like the last, while Apple is innovating new ways to interact with content no matter where it might be.
I was in a show case booth last year with Samsung's latest smart TV's. I was so underwhelmed. You know, it was full of all the apps and stuff, but... it quite frankly just didn't work. Voice didn't work. Motion didn't work. Apps didn't work. Typing with an old school TV remote didn't work. Track padding with the newer remote didn't work. It was aweful. I can't believe how such refined hardware (the display was good) was complemented with such aweful software.
Indeed it's leaving an opportunity for Apple... or anyone else with a vision for that matter.
Indeed it's leaving an opportunity for Apple... or anyone else with a vision for that matter.
Only Apple can do it.
I'm with Cook, I use my iPad and iPhone 80% of the time. (I remember not too long ago, when people on these boards were questioning how the iPad would fit in between the iPhone and laptops/desktops.)
The future is, relatively inexpensive Apple iOS devises with small screens, small SSD's using iCloud to access all your "stuff!" At home you will have a 50" to 90" Apple TV that is designed for movie watching and TV watching and maybe games. It will have an elegant design, elegant interface and seamlessly interact with said iOS devices as far as music, photos, video, etc. It will be controlled by Siri.
The hold up is a handful of backward thinking, price gouging Cable companies, whose days are numbered, btw.
P.S. And, eventually, Apple will have a dedicated iOS device in your car. Perfect!
I'm with Cook, I use my iPad and iPhone 80% of the time. (I remember not too long ago, when people on these boards were questioning how the iPad would fit in between the iPhone and laptops/desktops.)
The future is relatively inexpensive iOS devises with small screens, small SSD's using iCloud to access all your "stuff!" At home you will have a 50" to 90" Apple TV that is designed for movie watching and TV watching and maybe games. It will have an elegant design, elegant interface and seamlessly interact with said iOS devices as far as music, photos, video, etc. It will be controlled by Siri.
The hold up is a handful of backward thinking, price gouging Cable companies, whose days are numbered, btw.
In case you didn't hear revenue was up for the TV industry this past year. Apple has no leverage to change things.
Look at the pictures in the article. Just how blind do you have to be to think they're the same?
While I would agree they are not the same, the mark is likely heavily inspired from it.
If, hypothetically speaking, there was a trademark or copyright lawsuit and no prior art, Apple may have had a good case on plagiarism IMO.
These days a case like this would be very hard to win. The specific mic had been used many times over in varying glyphs. Adding a circle and florishes wont be considered unique enough. A trademarked logo maybe, but it won't be open shut case.
While I would agree they are not the same, the mark is likely heavily inspired from it.
If, hypothetically speaking, there was a trademark or copyright lawsuit and no prior art, Apple may have had a good case on plagiarism IMO.
These days a case like this would be very hard to win. The specific mic had been used many times over in varying glyphs. Adding a circle and florishes wont be considered unique enough. A trademarked logo maybe, but it won't be open shut case.
Android has had a similar microphone icon on it's keyboard since 2009. A full 2 years before Apple used it for Siri.
The problem with Apple is that they don't have technology for display screens. In the foreseeable future, Apple will have to rely on other vendors for the new flexible 4K OLED. screens for the new Apple smart TV.
The problem with Apple is that they don't have technology for display screens. In the foreseeable future, Apple will have to rely on other vendors for the new flexible 4K OLED. screens for the new Apple smart TV.
Apple's not gonna use OLED for anything of theirs. They've spent billions to get around OLED.
The problem with Apple is that they don't have technology for display screens. In the foreseeable future, Apple will have to rely on other vendors for the new flexible 4K OLED. screens for the new Apple smart TV.
"Flexible 4K OLED"? I think you might be kind of jumping the gun. I don't think Apple was planning on making a $15K novelty one off.
Anyway, here's what will happen if Apple brings forth a successful TV integration solution: some of the same people posting on this thread will rush to remind us that Apple isn't doing anything new or innovative, since folks like Samsung already were offering what they called "smart TVs", despite that such products haven't really caught on because they pretty much suck. It's enough that there's a preexisting category that an Apple product could be roughly assigned to. Some will claim that Apple's solution was "inevitable" and "obvious" and that therefore no innovation can be credited; the fact that such people cannot, at this point, explain to us what that obvious solution looks like until Apple offers it up will in no way mute their bellowing. Because such people are shameless fucking shit heads.
Finally, if Apple is successful, every other manufacturer of "smart TVs" will immediately start releasing products that mimic Apple's as closely as possible without necessarily triggering litigation. When anyone points that out, the same folk will express horror and disgust that obvious and inevitable things can be patented or copyrighted, that Apple better not try to stifle innovation by suing anyone, and that Apple's customers are dim-wiited fucktards for imagining that Apple is the only company that can figure stuff out. Because, again, such people are just completely contemptible assholes.
Some have called it S recommendation some call it S-Voice but here is what I see it as [B]Siri[/B] intelligent [B] voice assistant[/B] then [B]S[/B]iri[B] Voice[/B] assistant or recommendation the bold is what is in the name obviously the first is Apples.
Some have called it S recommendation some call it S-Voice but here is what I see it as Siri intelligent voice assistant then Siri Voice assistant or recommendation the bold is what is in the name obviously the first is Apples.
How about Samsung Voice? You're so biased that it didn't cross your mind.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
The Samsung logo looks almost entirely different than the Apple logo. So, again, what's your point?
No, this is almost entirely different. On the continuum of different, Samsung's is pretty close.
They already exist.
[IMG]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/18950/width/200/height/400[/IMG]
That microphone icon was in use before Apple used it. Are you also going to say "Samsung’s building TVs now that Apple is"?
Why buy one TV that can do that when it's better to buy multiple boxes and have all your TVs do it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCE10
Remember the pre-iPhone era? History is repeating itself.
Back then PCs were the central to how people use technology. So manufacturers tried to cram what worked on PCs into smart phones, while others tried to cram PCs into tablets, and both results were terrible.
Now that smart phones are the hottest thing, people start to cram what worked on smart phones into the device of the next battle field -- TVs. "Look! You can do all those cool things that your smart phones do right on your TV! Yay! We beat Apple to it!"
I may not speak for everyone, but I do not want to use my TV as a computer or a smart phone. I do not care for FB on my TV screen, nor do I care for web browsing at 10 feet away. I want to be able to sit down and enjoy TV -- all my favorite shows, at any time I want. There are quite a few contenders in this space, but so far none has met my requirement. Whoever can make a TV that does this will get my money.
Could not agree more, and think it is funny now that you put it into text, as to how everyone is trying to make the next thing like the last, while Apple is innovating new ways to interact with content no matter where it might be.
Indeed it's leaving an opportunity for Apple... or anyone else with a vision for that matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas
Indeed it's leaving an opportunity for Apple... or anyone else with a vision for that matter.
Only Apple can do it.
I'm with Cook, I use my iPad and iPhone 80% of the time. (I remember not too long ago, when people on these boards were questioning how the iPad would fit in between the iPhone and laptops/desktops.)
The future is, relatively inexpensive Apple iOS devises with small screens, small SSD's using iCloud to access all your "stuff!" At home you will have a 50" to 90" Apple TV that is designed for movie watching and TV watching and maybe games. It will have an elegant design, elegant interface and seamlessly interact with said iOS devices as far as music, photos, video, etc. It will be controlled by Siri.
The hold up is a handful of backward thinking, price gouging Cable companies, whose days are numbered, btw.
P.S. And, eventually, Apple will have a dedicated iOS device in your car. Perfect!
In case you didn't hear revenue was up for the TV industry this past year. Apple has no leverage to change things.
Look at the pictures in the article. Just how blind do you have to be to think they're the same?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
In case you didn't hear revenue was up for the TV industry this past year. Apple has no leverage to change things.
Agreed...perhaps it will be up to the 20 to 30 year olds that aren't watching TV in a traditional way.
Originally Posted by jragosta
Just how blind do you have to be to think they're the same?
Color. That's it.
Please don't tell me you're honestly pretending they aren't as similar as legally (or not) possible.
While I would agree they are not the same, the mark is likely heavily inspired from it.
If, hypothetically speaking, there was a trademark or copyright lawsuit and no prior art, Apple may have had a good case on plagiarism IMO.
These days a case like this would be very hard to win. The specific mic had been used many times over in varying glyphs. Adding a circle and florishes wont be considered unique enough. A trademarked logo maybe, but it won't be open shut case.
Android has had a similar microphone icon on it's keyboard since 2009. A full 2 years before Apple used it for Siri.
The problem with Apple is that they don't have technology for display screens. In the foreseeable future, Apple will have to rely on other vendors for the new flexible 4K OLED. screens for the new Apple smart TV.
Originally Posted by peter236
The problem with Apple is that they don't have technology for display screens. In the foreseeable future, Apple will have to rely on other vendors for the new flexible 4K OLED. screens for the new Apple smart TV.
Apple's not gonna use OLED for anything of theirs. They've spent billions to get around OLED.
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter236
The problem with Apple is that they don't have technology for display screens. In the foreseeable future, Apple will have to rely on other vendors for the new flexible 4K OLED. screens for the new Apple smart TV.
"Flexible 4K OLED"? I think you might be kind of jumping the gun. I don't think Apple was planning on making a $15K novelty one off.
Anyway, here's what will happen if Apple brings forth a successful TV integration solution: some of the same people posting on this thread will rush to remind us that Apple isn't doing anything new or innovative, since folks like Samsung already were offering what they called "smart TVs", despite that such products haven't really caught on because they pretty much suck. It's enough that there's a preexisting category that an Apple product could be roughly assigned to. Some will claim that Apple's solution was "inevitable" and "obvious" and that therefore no innovation can be credited; the fact that such people cannot, at this point, explain to us what that obvious solution looks like until Apple offers it up will in no way mute their bellowing. Because such people are shameless fucking shit heads.
Finally, if Apple is successful, every other manufacturer of "smart TVs" will immediately start releasing products that mimic Apple's as closely as possible without necessarily triggering litigation. When anyone points that out, the same folk will express horror and disgust that obvious and inevitable things can be patented or copyrighted, that Apple better not try to stifle innovation by suing anyone, and that Apple's customers are dim-wiited fucktards for imagining that Apple is the only company that can figure stuff out. Because, again, such people are just completely contemptible assholes.
[B]Siri[/B] intelligent [B] voice assistant[/B] then
[B]S[/B]iri[B] Voice[/B] assistant or recommendation the bold is what is in the name obviously the first is Apples.
How about Samsung Voice? You're so biased that it didn't cross your mind.