[Architekt]

Here's an article about the consequence of the Apple v Samsung court case that's just been resolved.

[Menace]

From the article "The idea that one company can own a solution to a problem is absolutely insane."

No, that's what patents are designed to do. Monopolies for limited times.

[Vicious]

A Californian company wins in a Californian court a global case that has billions of dollars in impact. You'll have to excuse me if I'm not convinced that this was entirely impartial.

[PhilE]

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/kirby_f...remix.html


Henry Ford once said, "I invented nothing new. I simply assembled the discoveries of other men behind whom were centuries of work. Progress happens when all the factors that make for it are ready and then it is inevitable."

STEVE JOBS in 2007: And we have invented a new technology called multi-touch. You can do multi-fingered gestures on it, and boy have we patented it

JEFF HEN in 2006 ACTUALLY DISPLAYING MULTI TOUCH: Multi-touch sensing isn't anything -- isn't completely new. I mean, people like Bill Buxton have been playing around with it in the '80s. The technology, you know, isn't the most exciting thing here right now other than probably its newfound accessibility

STEVE JOBS IN 1996: "I mean, Picasso had a saying. He said, "Good artists copy. Great artists steal." And we have, you know, always been shameless about stealing great ideas."

"back in the '80s, there were no software patents, and it was Xerox that pioneered the graphical user interface. What if they had patented pop-up menus, scrollbars, the desktop with icons that look like folders and sheets of paper? Would a young and inexperienced Apple have survived the legal assault from a much larger and more mature company like Xerox?"

[Menace]

I guess Samsung could not afford to hire lawyers to show that Apple's patents were anticipated or obvious.

[el mechanico]

(08-26-2012 10:19 AM)Vicious Wrote:  

A Californian company wins in a Californian court a global case that has billions of dollars in impact. You'll have to excuse me if I'm not convinced that this was entirely impartial.

That's right. We're the world police and court system. Thanks to the internet any page opened here can be considered a crime and we can come get you even if it's legal where you're at. We have agents all over the world and we're sending more.

[Samseau]

<---- Proud to have never bought an Apple product

[Scott]

This is sad.

I've been with Samsung phones for the past few years and they act like modern Nokias in some ways; they are seriously built to last. They're fairly cheap yet still subtly stylish and they are built like bricks. I've dropped my Galaxy so many times and it's only got a single crack in the screen (still works fine though) so far. Their products are pretty cool and it's a shame to see them lose out to a company which pretty much exemplifies 'high profile, low quality'.

[MrXY]

I have a cheap Samsung Galaxy that works great.

I assume Apple will go for an injunction prohibiting sale of Samsung phones in the US that supposedly violate the patent


Anyone who wants a Samsung should keep an eye on that

It's hilarious to me that SWPL types worship Jobs when he was exactly the sort of ruthless businessman and egomaniac asshole they say they hate

[Basil Ransom]

(08-26-2012 11:36 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

<---- Proud to have never bought an Apple product

I've never bought their products, and I love Apple. It's because they force other brands to actually make well designed products. Without them, the bar would be much lower. Without designers heavily involved in the process, you have socially retarded electronics engineers making things with little concern for usability or aesthetics. How do you expect men who wear sandals and socks to design a great looking, usable gadget?

There are other firms that do great design - Sony and iRiver come to mind. I still have a sick, metal MP3 CD player from iRiver that's way cooler than anything Apple has made.

All that said, it's *software* patents that are often bullshit.

Don't worry guys, Judge Lucy can handle it!



She sounds like the overbearing female executive type. The type who tries to compensate for insecurity by being imperious and rude.

[alphascout]

thomas jefferson is spinning over in his grave.

[PhilE]

(08-26-2012 01:50 PM)MrXY Wrote:  

I have a cheap Samsung Galaxy that works great.

I assume Apple will go for an injunction prohibiting sale of Samsung phones in the US that supposedly violate the patent


Anyone who wants a Samsung should keep an eye on that

It's hilarious to me that SWPL types worship Jobs when he was exactly the sort of ruthless businessman and egomaniac asshole they say they hate

PREACH!!!! My point exactly....THEY STATE THEY HATE BAIN CAPITAL BUT LOVE APPLE!!!

[OGNorCal707]

I love Apple products, the iphone is the shit, and their laptops are easy to use and rarely fuck up like PCs do, but then again I suck with computers and need something that's easy to use. I find it funny that guys on this forum try to act like Apple is the devil, it just so happens that all smart phones and tablets are rip offs of Apple.

[expectation]

http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/08/apple-sams...py-iphone/

Look at Samsung's internal document and tell me that's not blatant. They should've at least make an effort to cover their tracks by using other phones or something in their design memos. This is almost akin to plagiarism an essay in school.

At least with this, Windows Phones may get more notice.

[Enfant_Terrible]

^that's not copying, that's studying the competition

[Greek kamaki]

It is industrial battle.Samsung had probably made an agreement with Apple to provide them the newest CPUs without using them on their products and when they broke it and presented the Galaxy A(which was the first smartphone with stronger CPU than the iPhone and equally sensitive multitouch screen) Apple got posses and decided to lawsuit.
They do not like that the galaxy Note looked more impressive with the super amoled HD than the current iPhone 4s.These things count for customers (how good screens look the one next to the other,Apple laptops absolutely win the impressions in this regard).Moreover noone buys a Samsung phone due to touchwizz which is more of a burden despite Apple claims that popularity of Samsung phones depended on touchwizz copying iOS.

[Vicious]

(08-26-2012 02:11 PM)OGNorCal707 Wrote:  

I find it funny that guys on this forum try to act like Apple is the devil, it just so happens that all smart phones and tablets are rip offs of Apple.

Whether you prefer Apple, Symbian, RIM or Android is irrelevant in the larger picture, that's just fanboy wailing. If Apple makes good products or not has no bearing on this topic as a whole. Even if you can't ejaculate without sticking a vibrating iPhone up your ass this court decision is ultimately bad for us as consumers. The only winner here is the Apple brass, who even before this were heading the largest corporation in history.

[Roosh]

This will affect no one. Samsung will make a deal for Apple payola. They can't lower the price of their phones because the market is too competitive. Nothing to see here.

[expectation]

(08-26-2012 03:04 PM)Enfant_Terrible Wrote:  

^that's not copying, that's studying the competition

Except that almost every solution to their pitfalls is to be like an iPhone instead of providing their own solutions.

[Greek kamaki]

What Apple did was to exploit the superior software to gain advantage in hardware.As Stevie Jobs said ''you cannot be more than 6 months ahead of competition in terms of hardware but you can be 3-4 years ahead in software.''So they created advanced software which they sold in high price with expensive hardware.In order to get the software(the ios) you had to buy the hardware as well since they did not licence ios to any other company.Then when they locked a lot of people on iphone ecosystem and having their credit cards(because they sold songs,movies,apps to them from which Apple also made a profit despite them being third party products) they asked the manufacturers to provide parts only to them and not to any competitive company(for example Samsung to provide the CPUs,LG the screens,Imagination technologies the GPUs).

This would be forbidden in Europe under the anti trust law.However Asian companies agreed to provide exclusively Apple to gain high profits in return since Apple sold in mass.(it had dedicated fans).This series of events allowed Apple to have an edge in hardware despite not constructing it in same price as competition with less decent hardware when Andorid finally caught up as an operation system and could present a problem for Apple.At this point Samsung broke up the agreement and entered the mobile phone market with Galaxy S where it used the most advanced CPU it had created.Due to Samsung size it had the capacity to create its own screens(super Amoled) after it bought the company which created them and get very sensitive multitouch like the one existing on LG and Shapr screens which provided Apple.This pissed Apple off and started the lawsuits.Samsung's policy meant that android phones would eb able to catch up and surpass iphone in hardware since they were released in shorter time circles.With competent Android systems such as Froyo and Gingerbread Apple would face serious competition having to reduce their prices.They lost profits and tried to get them back by firing lawsuits.

[porscheguy]

(08-26-2012 02:11 PM)OGNorCal707 Wrote:  

I love Apple products, the iphone is the shit, and their laptops are easy to use and rarely fuck up like PCs do, but then again I suck with computers and need something that's easy to use. I find it funny that guys on this forum try to act like Apple is the devil, it just so happens that all smart phones and tablets are rip offs of Apple.

+1
I've noticed that people seem to fall into one of two categories: people who love Apple products, or people who hate them. The haters are like haters in general. They know more about my computer and my iPhone than I know. They know about more of their faults and flaws than me, which I always find ironic because they don't own the products. That's hatin', when you take the time to research a product you don't own, and never intend to buy, just so you can talk shit about it. And whenever some new product comes out, they always feel a pressing need to be very vocal and point out how much better they think it is than a similar Apple product.

Most Apple owners don't care. Most of us are happy with what we bought. Is it worth the extra money? IMO it is. I wouldn't buy it if I thought it wasn't.

[muc]

(08-27-2012 03:42 AM)Greek kamaki Wrote:  

What Apple did..

I do not really care about that lawsuit, but this was a great post.

[michelin]

that´s why I prefer Android.

The more open, the more innovation.

Monopolies make us consumers lose

[Screwston]

I'll never understand people getting so angry and defensive over a fucking electronic brand.

[Vicious]

(08-26-2012 06:33 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

This will affect no one. Samsung will make a deal for Apple payola. They can't lower the price of their phones because the market is too competitive. Nothing to see here.

While the individual suit will likely be managed by Samsung the decision will set a legal precedence that will have far reaching implications for the industry as a whole.