10-26-2012, 03:19 PM | #331 | |||
Wizard
Posts: 2,743
Karma: 32912427
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Device: Kobo H20, Pixel 2, Samsung Chromebook Plus
|
Quote:
It's the last paragraph of Apple's statement, which, in extremely cleverly-worded English manages to distort the truth, and which risks contempt: Quote:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworst...msung-apology/ Quote:
|
|||
10-27-2012, 04:54 AM | #332 |
Country Member
Posts: 9,058
Karma: 7676767
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Denmark
Device: Liseuse: Irex DR800. PRS 505 in the house, and the missus has an iPad.
|
I'm not sure whether Apple wants to claim that the Samsung Galaxy is not as "cool" as the Apple product - as confirmed by the UK court, or the Samsung Galaxy is as "cool" as the Apple product - which seems to be implied by the German ruling. They can't have it both ways - either the Samsung Galaxy is like the Apple product and therefore is "cool", or it isn't, and therefore it isn't...if you see what I mean.
|
11-01-2012, 11:04 AM | #333 | |
Captain Penguin
Posts: 2,944
Karma: 2077653593
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Device: Kobo Libra 2, Nook Glowlight
|
Apple ordered to rewrite "Samsung did not copy" note
We saw it coming.
Quote:
|
|
11-03-2012, 07:51 AM | #334 |
Enthusiast
Posts: 25
Karma: 496132
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Wales, UK
Device: Nook Simple Touch (US)
|
I've been following this thread for a lot of posts, and I have to say that a lot of people seem to be missing the point. Either that or there is a lot of disingenuousness, ignorance or plain stupidity.
Let's be completely clear, Samsung obviously and shamelessly completely ripped off Apple. External design and interface, even the charger. Look at the design. You don't need any fancy arguments to see what is plainly in front of your eyes. We could debate the evidence at length, but when even the Samsung lawyers couldn't tell the difference at a distance, that pretty much is the acid test. Let's look at one of the most ridiculed claims - rounded corners. On the face of it, fair point, round corners are everywhere. But look at the 2 phones. Why that particular radius? Why that curvature on the bezel? Why that bezel width? Why that particular shape and size speaker at the top. There are no slots, details, mouldings or protrusions like there are with other Android phones. If you look here you can see that in 2007 they were picking up on the same themes as Apple, started by the iconic LG Chocolate and Prada Phones. You can also compare with the HTC phones of the time, no blatant ripping off there. From the F700 you can see there are clear design themes which emerged, but there is no sign of a rip off yet. Apple took up the themes that were around and refined them to the point of minimalist elegance that they do with everything else. Samsung saw how much better the iPhone was in design terms than their similar F700 device and simply ripped it off. Let's turn to the interface. Almost all phones at the time had a grid layout with icons. Apple introduced the dock at the bottom - based on OS X. Apple introduced the interface with the tiled icons. Why did Samsung use that icon grid with icons that size? Why that many rows,and why the dock on the bottom? Notice that like Apple, their icons are also based on a tile format with rounded corners. Almost every other phone at the time had picture icons that weren't in a tile format. Look at the Samsung icon at the bottom right - that's a ripped off iTunes icon! They have even blatantly copied the sliding screens and dots to indicate which screen you are on. Then if you look what happened when Apple introduced Siri, Samsung rip that off too, with their voice feature - and, look at that icon. Then you can start to look at the Galaxy Ace. See an emerging theme? Apple didn't sue all the other phone manufacturers who were influenced by the iPhone, just the biggest one who totally and utterly blatantly copied it. The worst thing about this is that Samsung are better than this. They make all sorts of elegant devices at a good price point. Their design simply isn't as good as Apple's, as their own documents acknowledge, but it's a good company making good stuff. If it had been an unknown Chinese company that had done this, everyone would simply dismiss it as another example of product plagiarism from a country which doesn't protect copyright. Except it came from Korea, from one of the largest electronics manufacturers in the world. It's shameful. If I were Tim Cook, I simply wouldn't comply with the UK judge's recent ruling, I would just pay the fine without blinking. The UK judgement was absurd in every respect. As for the clear anti Apple sentiment that has been expressed here and elsewhere, this is not only more ignorance and disingenuousness, but also bigotry and hypocrisy. People will happily buy L'Oreal shampoo and drive Audis instead of supermarket own brands and Skodas, but they rail vociferously at people for buying Apple products... |
11-03-2012, 08:13 AM | #335 | |
The Dank Side of the Moon
Posts: 35,872
Karma: 118716293
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire
|
Apple loses right to trademark iPhone in Mexico:
Quote:
|
|
11-03-2012, 08:58 AM | #336 | ||
Wizard
Posts: 2,743
Karma: 32912427
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Device: Kobo H20, Pixel 2, Samsung Chromebook Plus
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
11-05-2012, 09:59 AM | #337 | |
Evangelist
Posts: 459
Karma: 4818038
Join Date: Dec 2010
Device: Nook, Nook Color, EVO3D, Surface RT, Galaxy S5, Surface 3
|
Quote:
That Siri Icon? Looks a lot like Google Voice that was around long before Siri. A grid of Icons? That was common at the time. A dock on the bottom? Same. I could go on, but I think my point is clear. The misinformation floating around about what Apple "invented" is mostly nonsense. They copy just as much IF NOT MORE than anybody else has, that much is indisputable. Singling out Samsung as disgraceful while giving Apple a free pass is ridiculous. Next time you walk through the door at Best Buy (or other generic retailer), look at the big wall of TVs from a distance far enough away that you can't read the name on them. If you can accurately name each brand, then we can talk about the validity of some of some of Apple's claims. Of course, if you can actually discern the difference between those TVs, I would argue you are also perfectly capable of telling the difference between a Galaxy Tab and an iPad. |
|
11-05-2012, 04:45 PM | #338 | |
Wizard
Posts: 2,549
Karma: 3799999
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: O'Fallon, Missouri, USA
Device: Nokia N800, PRS-505, Nook STR Glowlight, Kindle 3
|
Quote:
As far as chargers? How are they anything alike? Because they use the usb cables as the cords? That is something largely the entire market did, partially out of pressure from the EU for uniform charging standards. Last edited by Hellmark; 11-05-2012 at 04:50 PM. |
|
11-05-2012, 08:07 PM | #339 |
Cynical Old Curmudgeon
Posts: 1,085
Karma: 8495696
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Device: Kobo Mini, Kobo Arc, HTC Desire C
|
Frankly, icons in a grid have been standard since at least Windows 95... (no, it does not matter if it took longer for it to migrate onto handheld computers)
|
11-05-2012, 08:54 PM | #340 | |
monkey on the fringe
Posts: 45,460
Karma: 158151390
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Seattle Metro
Device: Moto E6, Echo Show
|
Apple Patent Suit Is Dismissed
Quote:
|
|
11-06-2012, 05:44 AM | #341 | |
Interested Bystander
Posts: 3,725
Karma: 19728152
Join Date: Jun 2008
Device: Note 4, Kobo One
|
http://www.mobileburn.com/20804/news...one-technology
FTC staff will recommend suing Google for antitrust violations related to smartphone technology Quote:
|
|
11-06-2012, 06:22 AM | #342 | ||
What Title ?
Posts: 1,325
Karma: 1856232
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bavaria Germany
Device: Sony Experia Z Ultra
|
They are rattling a lot of sabers at the regulatory agencies
Quote:
It seems as if Apple and Micro$oft refused to even negotiate on standards essential patents. Quote:
|
||
11-08-2012, 10:12 AM | #343 | |
Wizard
Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
|
Quote:
Which model from Samsung are you referring to that doesn't have a slot, because the F700 did have a card slot? To some people the shiny letters forming "SAMSUNG" count as a detail, I take it that that isn't your opinion? And do you think that having the speaker on top is anything beside common sense, since the device is supposed to be a phone? |
|
11-09-2012, 03:14 AM | #344 | |
Enthusiast
Posts: 25
Karma: 496132
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Wales, UK
Device: Nook Simple Touch (US)
|
Quote:
Of course icons in a grid was the standard UI that almost all phones had. However, why that size, that spacing, that number, why rounded corners and why tiles? If I asked you to design some phone icons on a grid, if you hadn't seen the iPhone UI, they would most likely look like all the other phone UIs that were around at the time. I'm a designer and I have been tweaking things like icons for over 15 years. I customised my Motorola Razr 2 Interface with new icons. I also customised my HTC Tytn2 interface after that. Yes they had grids, but the icons were smaller, the spacing between them was bigger, and they weren't in a tile format. Most phones at the time didn't have consistent tile format icons, but they did have a consistent appearance. The thing is that when you immediately look at the two screens, you can see with absolute certainty that the one is a copy of the other. It's almost like the Samsung version was an early alpha of the iPhone UI. The point about chargers is very important. Every other charger designed by everyone else is generic. It looks like the archetypal charger you get with Christmas lights to shavers. Same goes for laptop chargers. Apple's are unique. Designed to look nice, and much, much more compact. When Apple designed the iPhone charger in that completely novel cube form, there was nothing like it at the time. Samsung ripped it off utterly. Shape, size, rounding of the corners, even the positioning of the USB slot. It's so similar to Apple's and so different to everything else, that the only logical explanation is that they took the Apple device apart and copied it. Think about it, every other USB wall charger you have seen is a different size, shape and format, and designing the electronics to fit into a predefined box almost exactly like someone else's with the precise positioning of the charger slot in the same place makes no sense. Form follows function, things look the way they do based on the way their components fit inside. It's unquestionably a copy. Anyone denying this is blind or deluded. If you accept this, you have to accept the rest of the argument. Of all things, why copy the charger? It makes no sense. It's much more efficient to use one of the chargers you already make, because your factory is tooled up for it. Then look at the packaging design - why? Samsung is not a bad company. Compared with everyone else, it makes cool stuff that looks like product designers had some influence over the design and appearance, rather than the engineers deciding where everything fits, and asking the designers to make everything look nice afterwards. Apple uses a completely different design-led, integrated approach. The concept comes first and the hardware designers have to make the technology work to realise the design. For Samsung to act like cheap rip-off merchants does no-one any good and they themselves ought to be ashamed. |
|
11-09-2012, 03:39 AM | #345 | |
Enthusiast
Posts: 25
Karma: 496132
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Wales, UK
Device: Nook Simple Touch (US)
|
Quote:
The radius isn't the same and the appearance isn't the same. It's similar, and I think it could be fair to say that it was likely to have been a source of inspiration. In reality, we know it isn't a rip-off because we have all seen the prototypes Apple made when considering the shape. Lots of the prototypes were similar to other phones around at the time, or around now. If it was a rip-off, the iPhone would have the same proportions and detail design features of the F700. It doesn't. The point is that there is far less similarity between Apple's iPhone and the F700, than there is between the Galaxy and Samsung's own F700! It's also a golden rule of design that you don't copy something unless you can improve it. In terms of the phone appearance (the hardware is a separate debate) it's not an improvement, and it's not even an advance. If I asked you to design a phone with curved edges and sides, and a flush bezel, it simply wouldn't look much like the iPhone. How come all the other Android phone manufacturers' devices aren't rip-offs? They were influenced by the iPhone, but aren't direct copies. I keep coming back to the point about being a designer, because it's germane to the argument. When you design something, you don't just start with a shape, produce a single version, and then build it. You start with your concept, and look at all the details. For example the radius, the bezel width, the flush fit, the positioning of the audio output and volume buttons, the curvature of the edges, the positioning of the speaker ('the slot' - not a card slot) the shape and size of it. All these things arise by design, not by accident. One or two things could be coincidental, all of them can't be. Why didn't they even introduce different colours? With the plastic back it was easy. That at least would have been an innovation, and arguably an improvement. The Samsung designers clearly copied Apple, because they chose not to copy their own design. If we accept your apparent logic, Samsung's refinement of their design looks more like the iPhone than the Apple refinement of their own phone And your point about the logo is stupid. Sorry but you can't slap a logo on a rip off product, point at the logo and say, "See, it's different, look at that". This is proving my point about disingenuousness Look, just accept that you would have to be blind or prove that the Galaxy design existed in that form before the iPhone existed to disprove the claim that it's a complete rip-off. We know that Samsung can't prove that, and we know that Samsung looked at the iPhone's UI design. We definitely know that Samsung looked very hard indeed at Apple's charger and packaging. So - having looked at the whole picture, what is the overwhelming conclusion that any normal person ought to draw? Come on - be sensible |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Apple vs Samsung US Ruling | JD Gumby | News | 14 | 06-30-2012 03:49 PM |
Samsung smartphones outsell Apple | HansTWN | News | 99 | 11-15-2011 11:31 AM |
Samsung surpasses Apple as No.1 Smartphone vender in Q3 | =X= | Android Devices | 4 | 10-21-2011 10:56 AM |
Another round in the Samsung vs Apple war | covfam | General Discussions | 15 | 09-21-2011 03:30 PM |