Where were YOU, Samsung, in June 2007? Where were YOU, Samsung, In January 2010? Because I sure as shit know EXACTLY what Apple did on those two occasions. Steve Jobs was busy doing the keynotes that changed the entire tech landscape almost overnight.
They can't even innovate enough to come up with their own catch phrases. They say they are "Doubling Down" Their meeting goes: We are going to really innovate. Since Apple is doubling down on secrecy, we will have to double down on spying, I mean innovation!
Samsunf's copying is shameless but theft is the wrong term for it. I do wonder if Apple will go after Blackberry, whose Z10 is closer to iPhone 5 than any Samsung device.
Not sure about that. Apple's only solution is to litigate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Where were YOU, Samsung, in June 2007? Where were YOU, Samsung, In January 2010? Because I sure as shit know EXACTLY what Apple did on those two occasions. Steve Jobs was busy doing the keynotes that changed the entire tech landscape almost overnight.
Samsung make great products now? Not if my Galaxy Tab 2 7.0 is anything to go by - the screen is unresponsive (particularly close to the bezels), it suffers from lag despite having an equivalent speed processor and twice the ram of my ipad2 and in landscape mode, the keyboard virtually fills the screen making it difficult to see what you are typing. Also, its battery life is not as good and the build quality is cheap. Wish I had the iPad mini instead.
Maybe we should ask the people who invented the Graphic User Interface and the mouse what they think of all this.
Think any of them still work for Xerox?
Ironic how some of you get so bent out of shape, jumping to the defense of a company that built a large part of it's fortune on stolen concepts. They took an idea someone else came up with, and didn't pay them a dime for it, or even give them credit after the fact. That doesn't make them any worse than MS, Samsung, etc, but it sure as hell doesn't make them any BETTER, so lay off the hate and simmer down.
how ironic that you are coping a tired meme, that apple "stole" the GUI from Xerox!...
READ THE BOOK...
Apple gave something to Xerox for the GUI... BTW, at the time Xerox did not think much about the GUI they Invented... So since it was invented at the research arm(PARC) ...management thought, well let's get some money now instead of letting it sit and gather dust.
as the story goes, one Person inside of Xerox didn't think it was a good idea and tried to block it...
Read Walter Isaacson's book 'Steve Jobs' ...
and further more, Apple is is STATE-OF-THE-ART... thus the people inside apple who are apple, are proud of what they create, thus any "copying" that is done, will follow the other tired meme "Good artists copy, Great artists steal". BTW, one can not steal an idea, because in order to steal something you need to remove it, the original idea has to be changed enough that you would say that yes, that idea is alot better than the original... so has samsung done this?, or has Google done this for samsung?...
to be creative, Means having to sit around thinking of the next idea, it means you are going to look like you're doing nothing... Samsung doesn't like its employees to be looking like they're doing nothing; so if Samsungs employees only copy, they will not look like they are doing nothing...
Furthermore it probably takes four ideas/Prototypes to come up with the one good idea i.e. 80/20 split 80% wrong Ideas, 20% Usable Concept...
So you see Samsung is actually saving money by copying ideas of others... or at least the "samsung" family thinks so...
I have never understood how they can argue that innovation is being harmed by not being allowed to copy others. If anything it should drive innovation because when you are not allowed to copy from somebody else, you have to make your own solution, and thereby you are forced to innovate (or at least develop your own solutions, which hopefuly will lead to new and useful inventions).
Why are they allowed to get away with that argument without being challenged by the interviewer?
Not sure about that. Apple's only solution is to litigate.
The key word here is a keynote.
Keynotes? wow
iPhone keynote. iPad keynote.
I didn't see any Samsung execs demoing game-changing products. Did you?
Every major advance in consumer computing tech since the advent of the "home computer" has been either spearheaded or perfected by Apple. Not just a few. Not just some. But EVERY one.
I have never understood how they can argue that innovation is being harmed by not being allowed to copy others. If anything it should drive innovation because when you are not allowed to copy from somebody else, you have to make your own solution, and thereby you are forced to innovate (or at least develop your own solutions, which hopefuly will lead to new and useful inventions).
Why are they allowed to get away with that argument without being challenged by the interviewer?
I believe it's nigh impossible to create any new smartphone or tablet product today without someone claiming it infringes on someone else's IP. Often those claims turn out legitimized in the courtroom or by a licensing agreement between the parties. Whether you choose to call that use of someone else's IP theft, stealing, copying, unfair or simply an oversight it cane still end up as infringement. Every company, Apple included, does it.
No doubt sometimes the infringing company has no idea of the "theft", whether by choice or by ignorance. Perhaps some don't like the IP holders licensing terms and choose to avoid it until their hand is forced. Others may be well aware that their product is using IP owned by someone else but make a business decision that the profit to be gained outweighs any penalty or licensing they might have to pay. Certainly there's times when a company is aware of another's claims but doesn't consider them valid in the first place and thus properly ignored. Calling one "stealing" and another justified is often a product of someone's opinion rather than facts.
A small newcomer with a great original idea may never see any success with their competitive product if they end up in the the crosshairs of Apple, Nokia, Microsoft, Qualcomm, Motorola or some other large multi-national. Who could afford to take them on? A simple threat of litigation from one of those might be enough to abandon the idea. So yes, the high level of IP claims and lawsuits in the past couple of years probably does become a roadblock for innovation. If he doesn't come loaded with pockets full of money a small innovators only chance for a return on his investment may be to sell out to one of the big guns. As for the major players they just build their products and pay what they have to as needed. Lawyers and judgments are just normal business expenses. Just my opinion of course.
The first successful commercial GUI product was the AppleMacintosh, which was heavily inspired by PARC's work; Xerox was allowed to buy pre-IPO stock from Apple, in exchange for engineer visits[6]
Much later, in the midst of the 1988–1994 Apple v. Microsoft lawsuit, in which Apple accused Microsoft of violating its copyright by appropriating the use of the "look and feel" of the Apple Macintosh GUI, Xerox also sued Apple on similar grounds. The Xerox lawsuit was dismissed because the presiding judge dismissed most of Xerox's complaints as being inappropriate for a variety of legal reasons.[7]"
It may be worth noting that Wikipedia also describes the outcome of Apple's suit against Microsoft as having ended similarly, and for similar reasons.
I believe it's nigh impossible to create any new smartphone or tablet product today without someone claiming it infringes on someone else's IP. Often those claims turn out legitimized in the courtroom or by a licensing agreement between the parties. Whether you choose to call that use of someone else's IP theft, stealing, copying, unfair or simply an oversight it cane still end up as infringement. Every company, Apple included, does it.
No doubt sometimes the infringing company has no idea of the "theft", whether by choice or by ignorance. Perhaps some don't like the IP holders licensing terms and choose to avoid it until their hand is forced. Others may be well aware that their product is using IP owned by someone else but make a business decision that the profit to be gained outweighs any penalty or licensing they might have to pay. Certainly there's times when a company is aware of another's claims but doesn't consider them valid in the first place and thus properly ignored. Calling one "stealing" and another justified is often a product of someone's opinion rather than facts.
I hope Samsung pays you well for your shilling.
In this case, it wasn't accidental. Not only did the Tab look so much like the iPad that Samsung's attorneys couldn't tell the difference, but Samsung's internal documents indicate that they specifically set out to copy the iPhone. They had a long list of things that they needed to change to make their phones copy the iPhone.
It was a clear, deliberate decision to copy Apple's IP. Unfortunately, they're going to get away with it - they've made far more from their blatant copies than any fine will remedy.
In this case, it wasn't accidental. Not only did the Tab look so much like the iPad that Samsung's attorneys couldn't tell the difference, but Samsung's internal documents indicate that they specifically set out to copy the iPhone. They had a long list of things that they needed to change to make their phones copy the iPhone.
It was a clear, deliberate decision to copy Apple's IP. Unfortunately, they're going to get away with it - they've made far more from their blatant copies than any fine will remedy.
As I hope Apple pays you well for yours. /s
You sound silly and juvenile. I've said several times that Samsung "copied" Apple in many ways as you well know. They may still for that matter tho it's becoming less obvious. You didn't bother at all to address the points I really made in my post tho. Why?
I'd love to know if you believe that broadly written and issued software patents might be a hindrance to innovation in some cases rather than helping push the mobile industry forward. Do you have an opinion on that, which was the point of my post?
At best, even if Samsung did not infringe wilfully, they still did what they did. Sometimes "unintentional stupidity due to a complete lack of creative ability" counts as an excuse.
They're still on the hook for around a billion dollars.
Also interesting, that a jury - some of which was made up of everyday consumers - concluded that Samsung are ripoff-artists. The general consensus has been, for at least the last 18 months if not more, that Samsung are ripoff-artists. This is obvious at the product level - from hardware design to even the packaging. Even Samsung's own lawyers made statements that insinuated the same.
Samsung is probably one of the most notoriously corrupt and shameless copycats in the entire industry. it's in their DNA. Just like Apple has a certain "culture" in the way that it operates, so does Samsung. Samsung's culture:
During a panel at the Dive Into Media conference on Monday, Samsung Executive Vice President David Eun outlined a bold initiative to drive innovative thinking at the intersection of hardware and software
This talk of the "intersection of" sounds vaguely familiar... oh, right, Jobs talked about the intersection of technology and liberal arts. He also talked about the marriage of hardware and software coming from the same company.
It's amazing how someone can talk about innovation and yet echo another person's words in the same breath. Are they willfully ignorant, or just missing the part of the brain which allows for self-awareness?
Comments
Yawn. Samsung makes good hardwares, but failed at UI, OS and design. Forever a good a supplier.
Left in awe.
It is very funny to watch other people with their skateboard samroid phones as they literally fall apart in their hands.
They can't even innovate enough to come up with their own catch phrases. They say they are "Doubling Down" Their meeting goes: We are going to really innovate. Since Apple is doubling down on secrecy, we will have to double down on spying, I mean innovation!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Stop copying Apple = no more litigation.
Pretty simple, really.
Not sure about that. Apple's only solution is to litigate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Where were YOU, Samsung, in June 2007? Where were YOU, Samsung, In January 2010? Because I sure as shit know EXACTLY what Apple did on those two occasions. Steve Jobs was busy doing the keynotes that changed the entire tech landscape almost overnight.
Where were YOU, Samsung?
The key word here is a keynote.
Keynotes? wow
Samsung make great products now? Not if my Galaxy Tab 2 7.0 is anything to go by - the screen is unresponsive (particularly close to the bezels), it suffers from lag despite having an equivalent speed processor and twice the ram of my ipad2 and in landscape mode, the keyboard virtually fills the screen making it difficult to see what you are typing. Also, its battery life is not as good and the build quality is cheap. Wish I had the iPad mini instead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash907
Maybe we should ask the people who invented the Graphic User Interface and the mouse what they think of all this.
Think any of them still work for Xerox?
Ironic how some of you get so bent out of shape, jumping to the defense of a company that built a large part of it's fortune on stolen concepts. They took an idea someone else came up with, and didn't pay them a dime for it, or even give them credit after the fact. That doesn't make them any worse than MS, Samsung, etc, but it sure as hell doesn't make them any BETTER, so lay off the hate and simmer down.
how ironic that you are coping a tired meme, that apple "stole" the GUI from Xerox!...
READ THE BOOK...
Apple gave something to Xerox for the GUI... BTW, at the time Xerox did not think much about the GUI they Invented... So since it was invented at the research arm(PARC) ...management thought, well let's get some money now instead of letting it sit and gather dust.
as the story goes, one Person inside of Xerox didn't think it was a good idea and tried to block it...
Read Walter Isaacson's book 'Steve Jobs' ...
and further more, Apple is is STATE-OF-THE-ART... thus the people inside apple who are apple, are proud of what they create, thus any "copying" that is done, will follow the other tired meme "Good artists copy, Great artists steal". BTW, one can not steal an idea, because in order to steal something you need to remove it, the original idea has to be changed enough that you would say that yes, that idea is alot better than the original... so has samsung done this?, or has Google done this for samsung?...
to be creative, Means having to sit around thinking of the next idea, it means you are going to look like you're doing nothing... Samsung doesn't like its employees to be looking like they're doing nothing; so if Samsungs employees only copy, they will not look like they are doing nothing...
Furthermore it probably takes four ideas/Prototypes to come up with the one good idea i.e. 80/20 split 80% wrong Ideas, 20% Usable Concept...
So you see Samsung is actually saving money by copying ideas of others... or at least the "samsung" family thinks so...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
Samsunf's copying is shameless but theft is the wrong term for it. ...
No, theft is exactly the right word for it.
I have never understood how they can argue that innovation is being harmed by not being allowed to copy others. If anything it should drive innovation because when you are not allowed to copy from somebody else, you have to make your own solution, and thereby you are forced to innovate (or at least develop your own solutions, which hopefuly will lead to new and useful inventions).
Why are they allowed to get away with that argument without being challenged by the interviewer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathillien
Not sure about that. Apple's only solution is to litigate.
The key word here is a keynote.
Keynotes? wow
iPhone keynote. iPad keynote.
I didn't see any Samsung execs demoing game-changing products. Did you?
Every major advance in consumer computing tech since the advent of the "home computer" has been either spearheaded or perfected by Apple. Not just a few. Not just some. But EVERY one.
Now that we're talking about "innovation."
Quote:
Originally Posted by tryd
I have never understood how they can argue that innovation is being harmed by not being allowed to copy others. If anything it should drive innovation because when you are not allowed to copy from somebody else, you have to make your own solution, and thereby you are forced to innovate (or at least develop your own solutions, which hopefuly will lead to new and useful inventions).
Why are they allowed to get away with that argument without being challenged by the interviewer?
I believe it's nigh impossible to create any new smartphone or tablet product today without someone claiming it infringes on someone else's IP. Often those claims turn out legitimized in the courtroom or by a licensing agreement between the parties. Whether you choose to call that use of someone else's IP theft, stealing, copying, unfair or simply an oversight it cane still end up as infringement. Every company, Apple included, does it.
No doubt sometimes the infringing company has no idea of the "theft", whether by choice or by ignorance. Perhaps some don't like the IP holders licensing terms and choose to avoid it until their hand is forced. Others may be well aware that their product is using IP owned by someone else but make a business decision that the profit to be gained outweighs any penalty or licensing they might have to pay. Certainly there's times when a company is aware of another's claims but doesn't consider them valid in the first place and thus properly ignored. Calling one "stealing" and another justified is often a product of someone's opinion rather than facts.
A small newcomer with a great original idea may never see any success with their competitive product if they end up in the the crosshairs of Apple, Nokia, Microsoft, Qualcomm, Motorola or some other large multi-national. Who could afford to take them on? A simple threat of litigation from one of those might be enough to abandon the idea. So yes, the high level of IP claims and lawsuits in the past couple of years probably does become a roadblock for innovation. If he doesn't come loaded with pockets full of money a small innovators only chance for a return on his investment may be to sell out to one of the big guns. As for the major players they just build their products and pay what they have to as needed. Lawyers and judgments are just normal business expenses. Just my opinion of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PARC_(company)
"Adoption by Apple
The first successful commercial GUI product was the Apple Macintosh, which was heavily inspired by PARC's work; Xerox was allowed to buy pre-IPO stock from Apple, in exchange for engineer visits [6]
Much later, in the midst of the 1988–1994 Apple v. Microsoft lawsuit, in which Apple accused Microsoft of violating its copyright by appropriating the use of the "look and feel" of the Apple Macintosh GUI, Xerox also sued Apple on similar grounds. The Xerox lawsuit was dismissed because the presiding judge dismissed most of Xerox's complaints as being inappropriate for a variety of legal reasons.[7]"
It may be worth noting that Wikipedia also describes the outcome of Apple's suit against Microsoft as having ended similarly, and for similar reasons.
I hope Samsung pays you well for your shilling.
In this case, it wasn't accidental. Not only did the Tab look so much like the iPad that Samsung's attorneys couldn't tell the difference, but Samsung's internal documents indicate that they specifically set out to copy the iPhone. They had a long list of things that they needed to change to make their phones copy the iPhone.
It was a clear, deliberate decision to copy Apple's IP. Unfortunately, they're going to get away with it - they've made far more from their blatant copies than any fine will remedy.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
I hope Samsung pays you well for your shilling.
In this case, it wasn't accidental. Not only did the Tab look so much like the iPad that Samsung's attorneys couldn't tell the difference, but Samsung's internal documents indicate that they specifically set out to copy the iPhone. They had a long list of things that they needed to change to make their phones copy the iPhone.
It was a clear, deliberate decision to copy Apple's IP. Unfortunately, they're going to get away with it - they've made far more from their blatant copies than any fine will remedy.
As I hope Apple pays you well for yours. /s
You sound silly and juvenile. I've said several times that Samsung "copied" Apple in many ways as you well know. They may still for that matter tho it's becoming less obvious. You didn't bother at all to address the points I really made in my post tho. Why?
I'd love to know if you believe that broadly written and issued software patents might be a hindrance to innovation in some cases rather than helping push the mobile industry forward. Do you have an opinion on that, which was the point of my post?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
You mean this one?
Judge Finds No Willful Infringement of Apple Patents by Samsung
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/judge-finds-no-willful-infringement-of-apple-patents-by-samsung
Did you actually read the article you posted?
At best, even if Samsung did not infringe wilfully, they still did what they did. Sometimes "unintentional stupidity due to a complete lack of creative ability" counts as an excuse.
They're still on the hook for around a billion dollars.
Also interesting, that a jury - some of which was made up of everyday consumers - concluded that Samsung are ripoff-artists. The general consensus has been, for at least the last 18 months if not more, that Samsung are ripoff-artists. This is obvious at the product level - from hardware design to even the packaging. Even Samsung's own lawyers made statements that insinuated the same.
Samsung is probably one of the most notoriously corrupt and shameless copycats in the entire industry. it's in their DNA. Just like Apple has a certain "culture" in the way that it operates, so does Samsung. Samsung's culture:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/151659/samsung-takes-excluded-evidence-to-the-media-gets-reprimanded/40#post_2158987
^^^^^^^
Yeah. A golf bag.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
During a panel at the
This talk of the "intersection of" sounds vaguely familiar... oh, right, Jobs talked about the intersection of technology and liberal arts. He also talked about the marriage of hardware and software coming from the same company.
It's amazing how someone can talk about innovation and yet echo another person's words in the same breath. Are they willfully ignorant, or just missing the part of the brain which allows for self-awareness?
What a load of crap. Since when did making your product barely distinguishable from your competitor become "innovation"?
I'm taking a wait-and-see attitude too on whether these "innovation centers" Samsung is planning turn out to be "imitation centers".
deleted