Slashdot Mirror

Interesting comparisons. Just from the first link (hardware design), it looks like there's a better case that Samsung is copying Apple on phones than it is on tablets. (Incidentally, the iPad trademark matches the earlier Samsung picture frame on every single point, which is even closer than the match between the iPhone and the Galaxy S.)

As far as interface icons are concerned, I'm not sure what the law says, but from a practical point of view I think it's best to encourage companies to imitate each others' interfaces whenever possible: it makes it easier for consumers to switch from using one to another.

Samsung Digital Photo frame, 03/2006:
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/03/samsungpictureframe.jpg

HP Slate is easily distinguishable from the iPad.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/01/01-06-10hpslate.jpg
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/gadgetlab/2010/03/hp-slate.jpg

And the pictured JooJoo is the one that came out 6 months after the iPad. In it's pre-iPad form as the Crunchpad concept, it looked like this:
http://news.cnet.com/i/bto/20090410/crunchpad_600x415.jpg
Even more different from the iPad.

You would certainly be able to distinguish either of them from an iPad if a judge held them up 10 feet away from you. Well I could anyway, I can't vouch for other people's eyesight.

That is fanboy cherry picking. Go google tablet PC and check out all the old XP running tablet PCs that looked basically just like an iPad years ago.

I did. Here are the first five; tell me which of them looks remotely like an iPad to you?

Copy designs? I don't know, but who's copying who here? Look at this pre-iPad released Samsung picture frame:
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/03/samsungpictureframe.jpg

Or how about the iPhone 4, I mean, LG Prada that got released in 2006?:
http://www.letsgomobile.org/images/reviews/0019/lg-prada-1c.jpg

You tell me, what's so original about the iPhone 4 and iPad? Seems like Apple is the one who's copying.

And iOS is still ahead of Android in marketshare when you include all iOS devices - yet another vector you refuse to consider but is indicative of anything but Apple being stagnant.

Sorry, the facts say you're wrong. StatCounter includes ALL mobile devices, including tablets and iTouch devices - anything that is mobile. Android has passed iOS in marketshare and is second only to Symbian - which hasn't lost any marketshare.

Overall, Android is gaining at the expense of Apple and RIM - both are losing marketshare, everyone else is pretty flat (or tiny changes) except Android - which is skyrocketing. iOS is now in 3rd place, and could very well fall to 4th - especially if Nokia makes a big push in their historically-dominated markets with Windows Phone.

Apple can compete against one or many companies, but that few other single companies are capable of really competing against Apple

Except Samsung. In fact, Samsung has probably already passed Apple in terms of smartphone sales. They were very close back at the end of June, and at the sales growth rate of Samsung and Apple over the April-June 2011 timeframe, Samsung should pass Apple sometime around the first half of September - now. And HTC wasn't too far behind, with its sales growth rate putting it ahead of Apple sometime next year. No surprise that Apple is predominantly attacking Samsung and HTC - the two who have passed, or are threatening to pass, Apple in terms of number of units sold and marketshare.

All they are asking is Samsung to stop making devices that look EXACTLY like the equivalent Apple devices. And they appear to have enough of a case that a few courts agree, which means your assertion has been tested and failed in a court of law.

That's ONE court, that didn't hear Samsung's argument, and already greatly scaled back the scope of its INITIAL injunction. The other EU court - the Netherlands - pretty much slapped down Apple, hard. Samsung will face no real problem from that and will get to cheerfully continue sales in the rest of the EU - outside of Germany (which will probably end up following the lead of the Netherlands).

The Dutch court decided that Samsung didn't infringe on any "look" and that, in fact, the Apple CD was so vague as to be unenforceable. Additionally, the whole "slide to lock" thing was found to have prior art (thus tossing Apple's patent) - and we already have precedent in courts about the LG Prada being prior art for the physical look that Apple is trying to cement.

Also regarding that physical look, consider the Samsung media viewer from early 2006. Predates the iPhone and the iPad - and looks an awful lot like the iPad copied its styling cues...

The other reality is that very soon Windows Mobile 7 is going to start eating up Android marketshare.

EVERY analyst in this field has said that Android will emerge on top, marketshare wise, and that Windows Phone will probably end up in second place, with iOS battling for 3rd with Blackberry. That doesn't sound like Windows Phone 7 (get the name right) will eat up Android so much as it will eat up iOS.

Thanks for confirming you have zero reading comprehension skills. Read my post above again, and pay attention to the timeline in the example. Now consider the industrial design used by Samsung back in 2006. Sorry, fanboy, but this case is really without merit.

Yes, you can obviously make a tablet without fear getting sued by Apple - but Samsung decided they'd rather copy the design.

Can you perhaps explain, then, why the iPad looks suspiciously like a Samsung media player from 2006, down to the aspect ratio and rounded corners? If anything, it seems that the iPad took inspiration from Samsung's design, and that the Galaxy Tab is simply continuing Samsung's internal design language.

So you accept that Apple had the CD in 2004, but than ignored that and used a PICTURE FRAME as an inspiration? A picture frame that looked like this? And if Samsung thought their design was so damn good it would make a good tablet (if you fixed the backside), why did the next version look like this?

Because Apple registered the design in Europe in the mid-90s.... Nice try though. Why don't you try and look up things relevant to this case instead of irrelevant distractions.

Ummm, no. The design was registered in 2004. HOWEVER, much like registered trademarks, registered designs are not considered live until you start using them - go ahead and register your design or trademark, but until you start using them in commerce they are considered inactive. And if someone else starts using the mark or design prior to your use, then they get to keep using the mark or design thereafter.

Thus the reason Samsung's 2006 media viewer is considered prior art for Samsung's own tablets, as it provides a design language for Samsung to use.

Apple may have registered the design in 2004, but because they did not start using it until 2009, it wasn't actually active and any company that started using the same design prior to 2009 can continue to use that same design without concern.

The suit in Germany is based on the European Community-Design 000181607-0001 - filed in May 2004

Any "prior art" prior to 2004 please.

An oft-overlooked - but crucial - point of CD filings: you must have your design registered AND start using it for it to be considered 'active'. Just like registered trademarks in the US - they are not considered live and enforceable until you start using them in commerce.

Was Apple using that design back in 2004? No? When did they start using that design in commerce? Until that date - the design was registered but not enforceable. And like trademarks, others who use your registered design before you start using it are indemnified from infringement issues (it's why you often have small local mom-and-pop stores using "registered names/trademarks" without problem - they were using them before the larger entity registered and/or used the mark).

Samsung was using that design back in 2006, well before the iPhone existed or the iPad was even announced.

Yes, you can obviously make a tablet without fear getting sued by Apple - but Samsung decided they'd rather copy the design.

Can you perhaps explain, then, why the iPad looks suspiciously like a Samsung media player from 2006, down to the aspect ratio and rounded corners? If anything, it seems that the iPad took inspiration from Samsung's design, and that the Galaxy Tab is simply continuing Samsung's internal design language.

Too bad the LG Prada pre-existed the iPhone, and Samsung already had an iPad-looking product on the market in 2006. Seems Apple was late to the "looks party" - behind LG and Samsung.

No, Apple wants to stop companies building tablets that look very much the same as an iPad.

If only the iPad didn't look so much like prior Samsung products from 2006... Apple clearly stole the idea from Samsung; Samsung's just building on their prior design language.

Apple single-handedly made tablets and smartphones into the products you recognize today. Before Apple, we had products like this and this. Suddenly, post-iPhone, we have this and this.

I'm no fan of patents, but this is the exact sort of innovation the patent system was designed to protect in the first place. Regardless of the particular patents Apple has chosen to fight with in these battles, can't reasonable people agree that Apple ought to have some protection on their R&D investments?

Yes, I get that those problems are a side effect of flexibility and choice, but dont' try to pretend the the problems aren't there.

The problem of driving a car is having to get gas. The problem of living in a free society is having to pay taxes. You don't have a point other than stating the obvious.

Because it is ALL the apps that are launching.

Bull. "ALL" of her apps are not launching on boot. Please stop lying or better inform yourself.

SHe's end up either uninstalling everything or doing it one by one, checking to see ifthe problem has gone away after each uninstall

Learn to use your phone. In the settings, there is an option called "Applications". It will tell you everything that is running at that moment. Use common sense to figure out what app is causing a problem. App downloads lots of data from the 'net? Might be a problem.

Wow, the fact that we're even going down this road totally reinforces my impression of Android. This is shit that users shouldn't have to deal with.

No, the fact that we are going down this route is you are both (with all due respect) clueless on how to use your phone. Obviously, you'd rather have the walled garden experience than take the minimal amount of time it takes to not install a bunch of crap apps on your Android device. The rest of us with more than 2 brain cells to bang together will continue using our Android devices.

Some people also like to be able to always run the latest OS without jailbreaking or waiting for their carrier modulo their OEM to get their act together.

Yeah, some people do. I'd bet it's mostly nerds (like myself) that run around on tech blogs more so than the general population. Normal people buy an appliance when they get a cell phone and that's what they want. You don't upgrade the OS on an appliance. Smartphones in particular are complicated. People that aren't nerds have a hard enough time just getting used to how it is out of the box, do you really think that just when they are starting to feel cool using their new device that they want the rug snatched from underneath them by rebooting their phone into an unfamiliar version of the OS? Of course they don't.

Two-for-one deals and "I want a phone that supplements an iPhone and is compatible with my network," is a powerful force.

I know, isn't it just terrible that there is a great smartphone that normal working people can actually afford? The HORROR!

Android somehow has a majority of share and growth among smartphones, yet it does about 1/4 of all the mobile web browsing and something like 1/5th of all the app sales.

Why lie, man? Do you think it helps your case to quote such easily verifiably bogus stats? Here, Android has 36.4 percent of smartphone subscribers in the US and it is extremely doubtful that it is higher than that worldwide what with the penetration of Symbian. That is no kind of a majority so please just stop. BTW, the exposition of your lies invalidates the rest of your argument that was based on said lies.

I didn't think it was too bad; indeed our normal 3G seems to run at the USA's "4G" speed: I often download Ubuntu updates to my netbook at over 700KB/s sustained

In Jacksonville, FL, I just tested my Motorola Droid and got a 111ms ping, and 972KBps which is just short of a Megabyte. 4G speeds, i.e., LTE, are much faster.

Here you go.

http://www.blogcdn.com/green.autoblog.com/media/2011/04/wave-disk.jpg

seems like they have basically nailed a (improved?) wankel in front of a generator.

You think that's bad, check this one out: http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2011/03/japan-earthquake-vehicle-shipping-opt.jpg

Netflix, Kindle pay for hosting, not Apple.

> It pays for hosting and bandwidth for paid and free apps.

Oh yes, they're so hurting for money that people like you must shill for them being the middle man.

How many people would buy the iDevices today if there were no devs or apps?

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/03/20110302-10093662--img4470.jpg

Metal Gear Solid 4 featured an iPod.
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2008/05/mgs4_ipod1.jpg

"Nokia wrote to developers, "Qt will continue to be the development framework for Symbian and Nokia will use Symbian for further devices; continuing to develop strategic applications in Qt for Symbian platform and encouraging application developers to do the same.""

Meanwhile... http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/02/nokiawebcast-4.pdf-page-32-of-38.jpg

Symbian, QT, are dead to Nokia.

I wonder what will happen to KDE too. I mean, they rely on Nokia to spit out QT releases, I doubt they can handle both KDE and QT.
Likewise for other companies relying on QT.

It is not like trolltech was some gigantic company to begin with. Qt will live on, perhaps way better as Nokia gave up the stupid idea of pushing Qt framework to host OS which -itself- needs radical changes to begin with.

Ask a N97 user what he/she feels about Qt when the device C: (yes it exists!) has only 20 MB of free disk space. If Nokia gets the hell out of the way, trolltech has pretty much guaranteed the future readiness of qt with the radical 4.x changes. Same for KDE too.

While the 100 million figure is right... the market share is plummeting...

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/02/gartneros-sales-2011.jpg

"Nokia wrote to developers, "Qt will continue to be the development framework for Symbian and Nokia will use Symbian for further devices; continuing to develop strategic applications in Qt for Symbian platform and encouraging application developers to do the same.""

Meanwhile... http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/02/nokiawebcast-4.pdf-page-32-of-38.jpg

Symbian, QT, are dead to Nokia.

I wonder what will happen to KDE too. I mean, they rely on Nokia to spit out QT releases, I doubt they can handle both KDE and QT.
Likewise for other companies relying on QT.

"Qt will continue to be the development framework for Symbian and Nokia will use Symbian for further devices"

Yes, but they also say this:

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/02/nokiawebcast-4.pdf-page-30-of-38.jpg
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/02/nokiawebcast-4.pdf-page-32-of-38.jpg

"Qt will continue to be the development framework for Symbian and Nokia will use Symbian for further devices"

Yes, but they also say this:

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/02/nokiawebcast-4.pdf-page-30-of-38.jpg
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/02/nokiawebcast-4.pdf-page-32-of-38.jpg

I was watching this on engadget and couldn't tell from the images whether I watching an Apple or HP announcement.

This picture ... change TouchPad to iPad and put the guy in a black turtleneck....sure looks like the iPad announcement.. Look at this picture from the original iPad announcement... sure looks similar to me.

This e-mail app looks pretty damn close to the iPad one.

This keyboard sure looks almost identical to the iPad.

In general, I saw this as a rehash of the Apple and Google approaches to a common OS for Phone and Pad. Can't speak to either on "pc" though both have leaked rumors at least of having their OS on some form of a PC. To me this was a big "yawn" from a late comer to this space.

I was watching this on engadget and couldn't tell from the images whether I watching an Apple or HP announcement.

This picture ... change TouchPad to iPad and put the guy in a black turtleneck....sure looks like the iPad announcement.. Look at this picture from the original iPad announcement... sure looks similar to me.

This e-mail app looks pretty damn close to the iPad one.

This keyboard sure looks almost identical to the iPad.

In general, I saw this as a rehash of the Apple and Google approaches to a common OS for Phone and Pad. Can't speak to either on "pc" though both have leaked rumors at least of having their OS on some form of a PC. To me this was a big "yawn" from a late comer to this space.

I was watching this on engadget and couldn't tell from the images whether I watching an Apple or HP announcement.

This picture ... change TouchPad to iPad and put the guy in a black turtleneck....sure looks like the iPad announcement.. Look at this picture from the original iPad announcement... sure looks similar to me.

This e-mail app looks pretty damn close to the iPad one.

This keyboard sure looks almost identical to the iPad.

In general, I saw this as a rehash of the Apple and Google approaches to a common OS for Phone and Pad. Can't speak to either on "pc" though both have leaked rumors at least of having their OS on some form of a PC. To me this was a big "yawn" from a late comer to this space.

I was watching this on engadget and couldn't tell from the images whether I watching an Apple or HP announcement.

This picture ... change TouchPad to iPad and put the guy in a black turtleneck....sure looks like the iPad announcement.. Look at this picture from the original iPad announcement... sure looks similar to me.

This e-mail app looks pretty damn close to the iPad one.

This keyboard sure looks almost identical to the iPad.

In general, I saw this as a rehash of the Apple and Google approaches to a common OS for Phone and Pad. Can't speak to either on "pc" though both have leaked rumors at least of having their OS on some form of a PC. To me this was a big "yawn" from a late comer to this space.

Let's put this to rest. You are a taxpayer in a state/city where there are 4 lanes of road going in and out of the heart of your city. During rush hour, congestion hits and it's go, stop, go stop. You and all the other citizens who pay taxes in the city/state complain that something must be done. 5 years later there are 6 lanes of traffic. Rush hour is still go, stop, go stop. See where I'm going here? This is a cyclical problem that has no solution.

yep, NO solution AT ALL http://www.blogcdn.com/green.autoblog.com/media/2008/02/05_gx_carpool_lane_500.jpg

I live in Poland (Europe) and I pay $20 for (10)5/1 Cable, Its 5Mbit during the day (peak hours), but goes up to 10Mbit between 24.00 and 12.00. I can saturate my upload and download 24/7. There wasnt a single situation where I couldnt saturate my connection to the internet.
Whats more my provider offers $50 (120)60/6 connection, and from what I saw at my friends house it also can be saturated with no problem if the server you are connecting to has the capacity.

I dunno... I guess it depends if your tastes in statuary run to, oh, say the likes of this:

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.gadling.com/media/2008/05/david.jpg

The fact that modern vehicles often are in much worst shape after minor accidents is a trade off for the driver in them being in much better shape after major accidents. Many people with new vehicles will have full coverage and would rather their car be totaled in a fender bender than themselves be killed in a major accident.
1959 Chevrolet Bel Air and 2009 Chevrolet Malibu in 40 mph frontal offset crash test
Video
1959 Bel Air after crash
2009 Malibu after same crash

I realize that is a greater difference in years, and safety features, than you were specifically talking about, but the principle still stands.

The fact that modern vehicles often are in much worst shape after minor accidents is a trade off for the driver in them being in much better shape after major accidents. Many people with new vehicles will have full coverage and would rather their car be totaled in a fender bender than themselves be killed in a major accident.
1959 Chevrolet Bel Air and 2009 Chevrolet Malibu in 40 mph frontal offset crash test
Video
1959 Bel Air after crash
2009 Malibu after same crash

I realize that is a greater difference in years, and safety features, than you were specifically talking about, but the principle still stands.

In fact, the irresponsible MacBook Air and iPad had more than one hook-up. O tempora, O mores! MacBook Air didn't bring the latex, that skank iPad wasn't on the pill, and TWO more underweight babies were born into the cycle of poverty, suffering, and black turtlenecks:

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/10/2010-10-20279back2mac.jpg

My Blackberry Pearl came with a nice little leather carry case. The phone even knows if it's in it or not so that it can use different ringer profiles. Fits nice in the pocket and I never pocket dial. One of the best phone designs I've ever had.

http://www.blogcdn.com/mobile.engadget.com/media/2008/03/att-blackberry-pearl-8120-review-pcmag.jpg

I thought that too, when I first heard about this, but then I saw a picture of what was definitely the back of an iPhone 4, and it was definitely cracked glass.

How about a little known guy named "Steve Jobs"? He can do math too.
link
link

Even better, check the endgadget coverage of the 2006 WWDC. IT'S RIGHT ON THE BIG SCREEN. Article
Direct Link to image

If you think Adobe was the only large company to get screwed by Apple's change, read a Nokia technician's perspective on this: link

With all the power of the internets, the article can't give us more than a thumbnail of this robot.
You want some real robot pron, go to engadget:
http://www.engadget.com/photos/nasa-and-gms-robonaut2/2677799/#2677802

When I open that page, it disappears in a second, so here's the direct url to the picture:

Robonaut 2

Not so simple, it's .5% of Applecare cases, not .5% of iPhone 4 users. So the actual answer is much smaller as undoubtedly most iPhone users have never called customer service.

Nope, it's .5% (Jobs actually said .55%) of all iPhone 4 users.

Next, some really interesting data from AppleCare, we looked at the statistics, we asked what's the percentage of all iPhone 4 users that have called AppleCare about the antenna or reception, or anything near reception problems. Because you would have thought 'Jesus, it must be a lot of users complaining about this' -- So what percentage have called AppleCare? 0.55% Just one half of one percent.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/07/iphone-reception-pc-0894-rm-eng.jpg is the slide stating the same thing. The extra .05% would actually bump that number up to 16,500.

As others have stated, that number may not mean much, since most people were aware that *something* was going to be done about it, and therefore a number of people may have held off on calling about it. But approximately 16,500 iPhone 4 users did call AppleCare regarding the antenna/reception.

Have you held one of those in your hand? It'a too big. It's way too big. Just look at the thing!

It's not like anything was hidden or obscured, he did tell us the resolution very clearly, displayed in HUGE text behind him during the keynote - 326 ppi.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/06/apple-wwdc-2010-179-rm-eng-1276194052.jpg

What more do you want? If you don't like to see examples of marketing, you should probably go live in a cave (and a very remote one at that, caves are very marketable these days...)

I find this one the most interesting feature.

iAds

-1 offtopic for talking about what Jobs is showing in the unveiling powerpoint presentation? Apple fanboys have raided Slashdot, and they're retarded.

And it's not even particularly unobstructive ads, just see this image and this image showing them.

Steve is showing off interactivity with ads. Pretty cool, if you want to interact with a car ad.

"So now we've got this cool navigator on the bottom. It spins the car. The only way you'll be able to get one of these is through this ad on the iPhone. So if you want to get a Leaf you need to get an iPhone..."

Even worse than flash or those stupid punch-the-monkey ads. You actually have to interact with them.

And it's not even particularly unobstructive ads, just see this image and this image showing them.

Steve is showing off interactivity with ads. Pretty cool, if you want to interact with a car ad.

"So now we've got this cool navigator on the bottom. It spins the car. The only way you'll be able to get one of these is through this ad on the iPhone. So if you want to get a Leaf you need to get an iPhone..."

Even worse than flash or those stupid punch-the-monkey ads. You actually have to interact with them.

I find this one the most interesting feature.

iAds

And how do they do that? With a limited monopoly on the idea, not the implementation. It's the exact opposite coverage of copyright, which grants a limited monopoly on the expression but not the idea. Trademarks is a monopoly over a name under certain conditions.

And what are the points of those?

In the US constitution, patents are secured to "promote the sciences and useful arts", trademarks are used to protect consumers. The point of patents was to prevent guilds and companies from monopolizing knowledge by providing an incentive for them to release it to the public. Trademarks are useful because they let people understand what they are getting: if I want a Nintendo Wii and the package says Nintendo Wii, I should be getting a Nintendo Wii, not http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadgetmobile.com/media/2007/12/vii-2-white.jpg , trademarks are useful.

What patents are today, are not what patents were when they were first designed. They were to add to the public knowledge and let people do great things with it as building blocks. Today though? We have the internet, we have communication, etc. We need to seriously consider if patents are even worth it today because they fulfill none of the constitutional requirements and don't benefit the original idea of patents.

IANAL - but you can make the same argument for Microsoft or Google - for antitrust cases its seems to be mostly about market share. Once/if apple gets enough market-share then they will get visits from the DOJ too.

lol.. Steve may come to regret this little brag, in that case: http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/04/iphone-os-4-0096-rm-eng.jpg

From today's announcement, specifically Jobs himself: US Mobile Browser Usage

Android is already at 19% vs iPhoneOS (likely includes iPods as well) is at 64%. Considering the fact that first Android devices were released in October 2008 vs. iPhone's initial release of June 2007, I'd say Android is doing pretty fucking well!