In your world, I suppose that construction workers are totally invent buildings, and architects have nothing to do with it right?
And Apple does have patents on retina displays, and on the software that makes it work (and not just shrink everything down).
But whatever. I mean a shill's gotta eat.
Incorrect.
In my world, a construction company (Apple) would order a particular type of steel from a steel company (Samsung), then hire construction workers (Foxconn) to make the house.
In other words, Apple was responsible for how the house looks, Samsung was responsible for providing the necessary tech to make Apple's vision come to fruition, and Foxconn provided the labor.
I've lost track of when that case gets revisited... Wasn't Koh supposed to re-review the amount lopped off the awarded total to possibly increase or decrease the total amount?
Honestly, it wouldn't take much for Apple to get Samsung's products banned.
All Apple has to do is start investing in next-gen tech so that they actually INVENT something for once.
Samsung is already on its way to building 5G infrastructure. If Apple beats Samsung to that goal post, then Apple could use their invention to block Samsung devices if Samsung build 5G devices.
Industry standards come from a host of companies, not one. Samsung may work on an aspect of the 5G standard, but they won't own it. Furthermore, IP is only used within a standard when the IP owner agrees that it will be made available to anyone who wants it for a reasonable licensing fee. Otherwise, that IP would be replaced with something else. That's the point of standards bodies and FRAND. Apple actually owns IP in many different standards, a lot of companies do.
I'll tell you what, if you want to have even an inkling of credibility, try looking up something Apple invented, so we at least know that you're not ignorant and know everything there is about Apple.
By the by, my company actually contracts out work to an Asian manufacturing company. We create the designs, specify the materials, specify the equipment, etc. Pure outsourcing. But apparently the manufacturer does everything. Maybe I can fire my design team.
Care to specify which industry? We're talking about consumer electronics-manufacturer ecosystem.
In my world, a construction company (Apple) would order a particular type of steel from a steel company (Samsung), then hire construction workers (Foxconn) to make the house.
In other words, Apple was responsible for how the house looks, Samsung was responsible for providing the necessary tech to make Apple's vision come to fruition, and Foxconn provided the labor.
[SIZE=13px]"...[/SIZE] <span style="font-size:13px;font-family:sans-serif;line-height:19.200000762939453px;">is a brand name"</span>
<span style="font-size:13px;font-family:sans-serif;line-height:19.200000762939453px;">It's a trademark, not a specific tech of LCD. Sorry to burst your bubble.</span>
So when you see a beautiful building, you give credit to the steel company? Not the architect? D'okay...
And it's a trademark, yes, and the tech behind each variation is patented. And it's sourced from multiple manufacturers.
You seem rather deluded and angry that Apple is nothing but an overglorified Dell. I understand that as Americans, we would want to try to pretend our companies are better than they really are, but sometimes, the truth is undeniable. Apple is an art company, not a tech company. Just look at all their patents that are being invalidated left and right. Apple invents nothing. It's like Dell putting in an AMD 7850 on their XPS-series, so to compete, I put in an AMD 7850 on MY custom-built desktops in order to attract customers. Would it make sense for Dell to sue me for "copying" them? It's not even their GPU. Likewise, nothing on the iPhone is Apple's invention. The hardware is mostly Samsung's tech and the OS is a bastardized version of open-source BSD.
I'd like to ask you something before I leave. Has Apple ever created technology by themselves that didn't suck?
OS 9.x from Apple was entirely Apple's design right down to the kernel, yet it sucked so much that it made Vista look like the best thing ever since sliced bread.
Maps is another disaster that kills people daily due to the incompetent engineers at Apple that can't even make a functional navigation algorithm.
Don't take it the wrong way. Apple does do something better than Samsung, and that's drawing great-looking rectangles. But when it comes down to it, Samsung has the brains and Apple is just that kid on your school group project that does nothing but take all the credit.
Man, what a sorry excuse for a brain fart you are!!
I’ll summarize it has best I can, without being too rude or offensive... But you clearly have lost contact with reality.
So when you see a beautiful building, you give credit to the steel company? Not the architect? D'okay...
And it's a trademark, yes, and the tech behind each variation is patented. And it's sourced from multiple manufacturers.
It's too bad that in the case of houses, the architect did build something a 2-year-old couldn't design.
In the case of smartphones, a 2-year-old could come up with something like a rectangle with rounded corners. Hell, even LG had the prada. So no, I won't give Apple credit for that.
Now are you looking at the 5's first quarter in which it was only available for 2 months plus a week? And in that first weekend, they sold 5 MM.
Yes. I know that there are quite a few Apple zealots which made the initial sales very high, but notice how they were only able to see 15 million for the rest of the quarter, and during the HOLIDAYS, mind you.
It's too bad that in the case of houses, the architect did build something a 2-year-old couldn't design.
In the case of smartphones, a 2-year-old could come up with something like a rectangle with rounded corners. Hell, even LG had the prada. So no, I won't give Apple credit for that.
So Sammy's designers must be premies since they just copied the iPhone.
It's too bad that in the case of houses, the architect did build something a 2-year-old couldn't design.
In the case of smartphones, a 2-year-old could come up with something like a rectangle with rounded corners. Hell, even LG had the prada. So no, I won't give Apple credit for that.
Yes. I know that there are quite a few Apple zealots which made the initial sales very high, but notice how they were only able to see 15 million for the rest of the quarter, and during the HOLIDAYS, mind you.
Yes. I know that there are quite a few Apple zealots which made the initial sales very high, but notice how they were only able to see 15 million for the rest of the quarter, and during the HOLIDAYS, mind you.
And yet it was the #1 phone in the world. And Sammy shipped 10 MM in a month. Apple sold 5 MM in three days.
I've lost track of when that case gets revisited... Wasn't Koh supposed to re-review the amount lopped off the awarded total to possibly increase or decrease the total amount?
Yes. Koh ordered a new trial to determine the disputed amount from the poorly done jury reward sheet. It's supposed to start this November.
This is not to be confused with the other IP trial due to start in Spring 2014. (That's the one where she has limited the number of claim construction issues, so the trial can at least get started this decade.)
So Sammy's designers must be premies since they just copied the iPhone.
Samsung's mission is to make other companies make something popular, then to steal their thunder. Again, there's nothing wrong with this strategy.
Apple didn't invent anything with the iPhone. They made a prettier-looking device compared to Samsung's F700 and the LG Prada, but there was no inventing going around.
Suppose Apple invented 3G. Then they'd have grounds to stop competitors. However, that's not the case. Apple made a pretty-looking device and that's about it.
Comments
So have at it.
Is that a static sales rate? Does the launch month not inflate things?
How many 5's were sold in its first month?
Since Samsung doesn't actually provide official numbers, can we trust them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast
In your world, I suppose that construction workers are totally invent buildings, and architects have nothing to do with it right?
And Apple does have patents on retina displays, and on the software that makes it work (and not just shrink everything down).
But whatever. I mean a shill's gotta eat.
Incorrect.
In my world, a construction company (Apple) would order a particular type of steel from a steel company (Samsung), then hire construction workers (Foxconn) to make the house.
In other words, Apple was responsible for how the house looks, Samsung was responsible for providing the necessary tech to make Apple's vision come to fruition, and Foxconn provided the labor.
Nope, not a patent:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retina_Display
"... is a brand name"
It's a trademark, not a specific tech of LCD. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Koh denied Apple's requests today. The damages still stand at about $1B.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-30/apple-loses-bid-for-a-new-samsung-trial-on-trade-dress.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshKar426
Honestly, it wouldn't take much for Apple to get Samsung's products banned.
All Apple has to do is start investing in next-gen tech so that they actually INVENT something for once.
Samsung is already on its way to building 5G infrastructure. If Apple beats Samsung to that goal post, then Apple could use their invention to block Samsung devices if Samsung build 5G devices.
Industry standards come from a host of companies, not one. Samsung may work on an aspect of the 5G standard, but they won't own it. Furthermore, IP is only used within a standard when the IP owner agrees that it will be made available to anyone who wants it for a reasonable licensing fee. Otherwise, that IP would be replaced with something else. That's the point of standards bodies and FRAND. Apple actually owns IP in many different standards, a lot of companies do.
I'll tell you what, if you want to have even an inkling of credibility, try looking up something Apple invented, so we at least know that you're not ignorant and know everything there is about Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast
By the by, my company actually contracts out work to an Asian manufacturing company. We create the designs, specify the materials, specify the equipment, etc. Pure outsourcing. But apparently the manufacturer does everything. Maybe I can fire my design team.
Care to specify which industry? We're talking about consumer electronics-manufacturer ecosystem.
So when you see a beautiful building, you give credit to the steel company? Not the architect? D'okay...
And it's a trademark, yes, and the tech behind each variation is patented. And it's sourced from multiple manufacturers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshKar426
You seem rather deluded and angry that Apple is nothing but an overglorified Dell. I understand that as Americans, we would want to try to pretend our companies are better than they really are, but sometimes, the truth is undeniable. Apple is an art company, not a tech company. Just look at all their patents that are being invalidated left and right. Apple invents nothing. It's like Dell putting in an AMD 7850 on their XPS-series, so to compete, I put in an AMD 7850 on MY custom-built desktops in order to attract customers. Would it make sense for Dell to sue me for "copying" them? It's not even their GPU. Likewise, nothing on the iPhone is Apple's invention. The hardware is mostly Samsung's tech and the OS is a bastardized version of open-source BSD.
I'd like to ask you something before I leave. Has Apple ever created technology by themselves that didn't suck?
OS 9.x from Apple was entirely Apple's design right down to the kernel, yet it sucked so much that it made Vista look like the best thing ever since sliced bread.
Maps is another disaster that kills people daily due to the incompetent engineers at Apple that can't even make a functional navigation algorithm.
Don't take it the wrong way. Apple does do something better than Samsung, and that's drawing great-looking rectangles. But when it comes down to it, Samsung has the brains and Apple is just that kid on your school group project that does nothing but take all the credit.
Man, what a sorry excuse for a brain fart you are!!
I’ll summarize it has best I can, without being too rude or offensive... But you clearly have lost contact with reality.
Now are you looking at the 5's first quarter in which it was only available for 2 months plus a week? And in that first weekend, they sold 5 MM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast
So when you see a beautiful building, you give credit to the steel company? Not the architect? D'okay...
And it's a trademark, yes, and the tech behind each variation is patented. And it's sourced from multiple manufacturers.
It's too bad that in the case of houses, the architect did build something a 2-year-old couldn't design.
In the case of smartphones, a 2-year-old could come up with something like a rectangle with rounded corners. Hell, even LG had the prada. So no, I won't give Apple credit for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
Now are you looking at the 5's first quarter in which it was only available for 2 months plus a week? And in that first weekend, they sold 5 MM.
Yes. I know that there are quite a few Apple zealots which made the initial sales very high, but notice how they were only able to see 15 million for the rest of the quarter, and during the HOLIDAYS, mind you.
So Sammy's designers must be premies since they just copied the iPhone.
Yes, the iPhone 5 is just a rectangle.
As many as could be made; shortages everywhere.
Man, this guy went to Trolling 101.
Again, people, don't reply to the idiot. Report it. This thread is completely lost anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
I've lost track of when that case gets revisited... Wasn't Koh supposed to re-review the amount lopped off the awarded total to possibly increase or decrease the total amount?
Yes. Koh ordered a new trial to determine the disputed amount from the poorly done jury reward sheet. It's supposed to start this November.
This is not to be confused with the other IP trial due to start in Spring 2014. (That's the one where she has limited the number of claim construction issues, so the trial can at least get started this decade.)
But I'm bored.
Plus, there's such a thing as multitasking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
So Sammy's designers must be premies since they just copied the iPhone.
Samsung's mission is to make other companies make something popular, then to steal their thunder. Again, there's nothing wrong with this strategy.
Apple didn't invent anything with the iPhone. They made a prettier-looking device compared to Samsung's F700 and the LG Prada, but there was no inventing going around.
Suppose Apple invented 3G. Then they'd have grounds to stop competitors. However, that's not the case. Apple made a pretty-looking device and that's about it.