Slashdot Mirror
Apple Possibly Pursuing Another iMac-look Clone
Cybersonic writes: "Cnet has an interesting story where they are thinking about going after yet another company making a translucent PC. " It's a company from Australia that makes something called "FishPC". It's not a standalone machine like the iMac is, which the company pointed out when interviewed.Update: 04/24 03:54 by H :I've been told that the case is actually AMD's EasyNow! design - thanks to Chris Tom for the head's-up. Wonder why they aren't suing AMD?
The average consumer likes his computer to look like he got it at ToysRus.
-cibrPLUR
Holy Wars are almost always pointless, but this one takes irrelevance to an extreme. If the primary factor in using a mac is the product design, then the OS must be irrelevant. It's not - the Mac is the MacOS, not the hardware.
Here's what I wrote to the author of a MacCentral article on the topic last week:
Regarding the FishPC -
While this does show resemblance to the original iMac's Blue & White color scheme, this is no eOne. The photo in your article shows that the guts of the machine are all contained in a seperate CPU tower, a tower which looks nothing like apple's G3 Blue & White CPU. At most, the monitor's translucent plastic looks very similar to Apple's B&W 17" monitor scheme.
While the FishPC may not be breaking much in the way of new ground in industrial design, I don't think this is as blatant a case of copyright infringement as we've seen in the past. In fact, I may even be rooting for FishPC's success in the inevitable lawsuit. After all, just because you can't afford a G4 doesn't mean you should be doomed to a lifetime of ugly computer cases.
-carl hirsch
. We've got computers, we're tapping phone lines, you know that ain't allowed - Talking Heads, "Life During Wartime"
IP must be protected at all costs. It is this doggedness that has made Apple the success they are. Their zeal to protect their hardware and keep it closed has propelled them from the #1 computer company to number #43. Clearly, they feel more comfortable as the underdog and this move will ensure that they stay behind the pack.
Well done, Apple !
Apple doesn't have a leg to stand on. Those "jelly sandle" people from the late '80s should be suing Apple.
Am I the only one who thinks the iMac looks like "Barbie's Dream Computer"?
--
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
Apple have every right in the world to go after other computer manufacturers that steal the "look and feel" of their machines. Apple spent a lot of money in doing market research and coming up with innovative ideas when designing the iMac, and it is quite right that they should be the sole benefits of this work and effort.
Unless a company has the right to protect the fruits of their time, money and effort then they will not bother to come up with such innovations and new technologies. This is very much related to the whole issue of patents - a company that spends time and money on something should be allowed to benefit from that money without fear of it being stolen. After all, why bother to innovate if another company is going to steal your work a month later? This is what most /.ers seem to fail to realise in their knee-jerk anti-patent fanaticism.
The fact is, at the end of the day our society is based around an ultra-capitalist ideal - the "American dream" of bettering yourself by gaining money and influence at the expense of others. The corporation is simply the Platonic ideal of this social structure, and as such, they deserve to be able to defend themselves from predators - and in this way, patents serve as the "anti-bodies" of the economy, and are just as necessary for a healthy organism.
This is just as silly as Amazon copyrighting "one-click". Maybe I've been in a cave my entire life, but I seem to remember there being translucent colors before there was Apple and the iMac.
Jobs, why stop with computers? There are plenty of other companies you can sue. Makers of pagers, cell phones, console gaming systems, etc. are all riding the "iMac" wave.
Think different, my ass. Think VICIOUS. Maybe this would be a good time for Microsoft to sue Apple for emulating their business practices.
I went to view them on the Fish PC website and I'll say this - if Apple could beat Future Power and eMachines in court, they should have no problem whatsoever stomping this one. Even though I don't see anything wrong with other companies trying to imitate the Apple "style", this is a dead ringer for an iMac, even down to the color choices. The only difference of any significance appears to be a few control buttons on the front panel. What were these guys thinking? Like it or not, this looks like an open-and-shut case for Apple, and a waste of time and money for Fish.
- -Josh Turiel
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
One of the disadvantages of living in a real-time world is that there's a pressure to "break" stories even before they have a chance to become real. If you actually read the story, you'll find that Apple is still evaluating the situation. It's true that Apple has pursued other "imitators" in the past, but are they going to pursue FishPC? It's not clear at this point.
The fact that the article stated that attempts to contact AMD but couldn't reach anyone because of the Easter weekend is another tipoff about how quickly such articles are getting thrown together. This isn't necessarily bad, but unfortunately not all Slashdot readers seem to understand the difference between "a developing story", where the facts are still being researched, and a more thoughtful analysis news piece which fairly tells both sides of the story, such as you might find in a quality monthly news/analysis magazine. Both have their places, but people seem to instantly jump on these developing pieces without recognizing that that all of the facts might not yet be in yet, and that in this case Apple may not have even decided what to do yet.
Saying a computer is just an appliance is a bit like saying a cat is just a beast, like a dog or iguana. Spend enough time around computers and cats, and you'll see that there's a bit more to them than that. (Maybe that is why, according to the Jargon File, "it is widely grokked that cats have the hacker nature.")
That said, regardless of your feelings on the iMac's design, it is in no way, shape, or form, the exclusive result of Apple's "innovation". They coupled the simple, one-piece form factor of IBM's PS/1 with the "melted-jellybean" design seen so faddishly often in cars and other devices nowadays. A great marketing move, in true Jobsian fashion, but for Apple to claim some sort of exclusive rights to it is ludicrous. Elements specific to the iMac's design might be trademarked, as is the little Apple logo or Nike swoosh, for example, but for them to sue anyone making a colorful clear-case computer is about as ridiculous as one-click patents.
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
In fact, it is not Apple, nor Microsoft...
I remember in 1986 I bought a transparrent joystick. Seriously, it was made of transparrent plastick so you could see everything inside. I still see joysticks like that sometimes. There are also transparrent toys with electric mechanisms and even transparrent cars.
I don't think Apple has the right to tell you not to make transparrent computer cases simply because it was not them who invented transparrent materials.
On the other hand if someone copies the form of their computer, like the shape of the box, then they could argue that they were the first ones with this shape.
You can't handle the truth.
Apple really doesn't have a case here, even if they do decide to go with it, looking at the system, it does have a translucent monitor case, but the style is not "iMacish". This is also not an "all in one" pc, there's the pc, monitor and other peripherals. My opinion is that having a colored translucent case isn't enough of an original idea to justify going on a rampage every time someone else uses it, it's not a new idea either, (anyone ever see those tacky transparent phones?) Apple is spending so much money on defending the "look and feel" of their products that one wonders of the quality of performance suffers because of it, even when the "look and feel" isn't all that similar. Like I said, apart from the translucent case on the monitor, the similarity of appearance ends quite distinctly there, the style and implementation of the system is too markedly different to be worth suing over.
Stupid is as stupid dies.
It sure doesn't look like an apple, I don't know, these weird gardeners?
Seriously, it does not look like IMAC, it looks more like an old "Casper" monitor made of transparrent plastic and the components are separate.
You can't handle the truth.
This is bullocks. Sure, someone else also thought to make an excessively mod personal computer, but does Apple have a trademark on swank, or translucent plastic for that matter?
Some important distinctions to note:
The monitor is not gumdrop shaped
The computer is a seperate component from the monitor
The mouse appears to be usable
Another damned comic
+++ NO CARRIER
They don't another incident like the one in which Microsoft stole the GUI that they stole from Xerox!
Got Rhinos?
FishPC, that is.
... a foot-tall fish-shaped system unit, with separate monitor and separate speakers.
First it checks your plugins. Note that this is slow enough (on a 28.8k modem) that it can put up a page saying what it is doing.
Then you get a page that presumably has some huge graphic on it. I didn't wait for it to load - I clicked on "enter html page". The alternative was flash.
Next another page, possibly also with a huge graphic. The only text on the page? A link, titled enter. I clicked it.
Now another of these slow "I'm checking you out" pages. This one is trying to find out what browser I'm using. How long can it take them to look in the http headers? I click on "netscape / ie 4.0 + 5" because I think that might be what I have.
Finally (the name of the file is frame_four.html) I get to the content. It is graphic intensive, and the main graphic is an animated gif, which rotates so fast you can't actually make out any details. But amidst the blurs I can make out
No wonder Apple are suing. I've half a mind to sue these bastards myself.
--
E_NOSIG
But, there is a limit to this. Remember when Apple and Microsoft effectively both tried to copyright the GUI? (which they had both ripped off from Xerox anyway) what it they had succeeded? What if the judge had come down firmly for one side or the other?
If one company has the exclusive right to produce PCs that look good and are designed for the home, it would be as damaging to the computer industry as if only one company had the right to make GUIs.
Yes, the eOne was clearly trying to pass itself off as an iMac, both in name and looks, which could confuse consumers and steal customers from Apple; but this is like Sony trying to prevent other hi-fi manufacturers from selling hi-fis with black boxes.
Paint it beige and it's just another monitor. Ugh. What a world.
...In other news today, Apple announced the company had filed suit against the Pacific jellyfish Aequoria victoria. Legal representatives for the company cited the gelatinous organism's rounded shape, translucent body, colorful bioluminescence, and utter brainlessness.
According to the Apple spokesman, "We believe our lawsuit is justified, as the resemblence to the iMac is obvious". No comment was available from the jellyfish, which was last seen munching on zooplankton.
Until a few years ago, actually. Until they really started screwing up (as in, bad even by Apple's standards), they were consistently in the top 5 when each quarter's sales results were announced. They were usually in the top 3, and sometimes #1.
Apple's unmatched ability to shoot itself in the foot, combined with consolidation in the industry, removed them from this tier. However, they're within shooting distance, but even reaching #1 will make them small enough that they're still a niche . . .
I suggest making the little Reserved Symbol (R) ni the Apple icon at least as big as the Apple icon itself. Maybe reverse the sizes of the reserved symbol and the Apple symbol?
v2sw7CUPhw5ln6pr5Pck4ma7u7LFw0m6g/l7Di5e6t5Ab6TH.
No, they'd be sued by me; I've patented the color blue, at all possible wavelengths.
Does this anger you? Then you better send me some more money, because I've patented that emotion.
If I remember correctly Apple was only able to defend IP in the US against Daewoo. The chance of them defending IP on grounds of look and feel in Taiwan was pretty slim. However, since e-machines was selling (fairly well at that) in the US they could persue them in US court.
I suspect that Apple pervailing on this case will depend on IP law is AU. And as long as they are not selling the cases in the US then Apple will have a disadvantage in the case.
And I am a hacker. I actually own two cats... One is more of a hacker, the other is a cracker. One spends the entire day building cool stuff with boxes, the other is trying to exploit the security on the cupboard that contains the catnip! I guess I should rename the cracker cat to 5cr1p7 k177y or something... I like it...
2. The actual reason they are suing: They don't want anyone else making a PC that looks as cool as theirs.
I'm not sure about this one. If I come out with a cool new desk, that looks cool but isn't otherwise particularly special, can I stop people from making knockoffs? Can Nintendo sue the Digimon people (or Digimon sue Pokemon, I need to check the chronology) because it's horning in on their "collect cute monsters" style of gaming? Can Wizards of the Coast sue Lord British for ripping off the D&D theme? Would we want them to be able to?
I think it all depends on the law. If the law says, "you can Copyright/Patent the look of a PC" then if Apple filled out all the correct paperwork, I'm guessing Apple wins. If they are trying to sue them based on the, "They're fooling people into thinking it is a genuine iMac," then they are being disingenuous, I think, and may win but should lose.
All the creatures will die, And all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai. (Jubai, 1605)
Apple has NOT attacked this company yet. And I don't think they will. Why? Because this is quite clearly not an iMac ripoff.
People here seem to have the misconception that Apple's just suing people who make their cases out of translucent plastic. This isn't right, and it wouldn't be right of Apple to do it. No, Apple goes after companies that blatantly rip off the iMac's design. And it does have a right to do this. Look at FuturePower's own ripoff, the ePower. Frankly, I'm surprised they didn't just leave the Apple logo on the cases; it is the only difference. It is clearly meant to confuse the consumer.
Translucent plastic certainly isn't new. But it's not the issue, either. The iMac has a design that is clearly non-generic, and computer companies have done little but rip it off. I applaud AMD for making a "cool" case that doesn't rip off the iMac; this would be why Apple won't sue them. It's an original design, and even though most of the color schemes are quite awful (at least the iMac doesn't clash with itself, even though it might clash with everything else) it's a good and original idea.
Give me a break. Apple has spent many millions of dollars establishing the iMac look as a distinctive product identification. Predicatably we have dozens of companies looking to rip this off. What the hell is preventing these other companies from developing their own distinctive case design? Nothing, except they lack the talent to do so. Apple worked hard to establish this in the market, and deserves the rights to it. Do slashdotters go after Coca-Cola for defending their coke bottle shape from copiers? I don't think so.
Some users have pointed out that this design is not the same as the iMac in that it is not all in one. Well, get a clue - Apple sells other computers with the iMac look that are also not all in one. Ever see the Blue and White G3 with matching monitor?
And then there was the comment about the AMD Easy Now design. Give me a break! This design looks NOTHING like any of Apple's computers. Solid purple color with green trim? REAL close to an iMac, NOT!!!!
My favorite quote from the article:
;-)
What also makes the system very different is the CPU--it stands under 30 cm high and has a front-loading CD-ROM system.
DAMN! I didn't know Intel made CPU's that big--I always thought they were getting smaller! And a built-in CD-ROM? Holy crap, that must require a huge heatsink!
Oh, wait a minute, perhaps this is just a case of CNET interviewing a moron...
Grow up Apple. First it's other people's computers look too much like yours. Then it's other people's skins look too much like yours. Stop pretending colored cases and skinned ui is some fscking brilliant thing. Begone UI troll. The whole computer industry was based on copying and sharing of ideas. Innovation is what keeps you a step /ahead/ of people. It is not a guarantee that nobody else will follow you.
And by the way, why the heck is the CDROM on this fish thing sideways, eating up the surface space of the case? Do too many people really think the CDROM is a mug holder or something?
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Do we need a little "confidence" rating or something in the title bar of some of these stories for the link-following and research impaired, like me, who don't want to spend all day verifying slashdot stories? A bar or percentage maybe...going to 100% when actually confirmed for a fact. Something like this might have dispelled some of the hype over the "phantom" Frontpage security hole, e.g.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Why is having a translucent PC case good?
Consumer asthetics only.
The Handspring Visor now comes in translucent plastics, in five colors. My wife, who once considered my Palm Pilot a useless little geek gadget, saw the review for the Visor, and absolutely had to have one, in translucent orange, of course.
Yes, I know the Visor is basically a Pilot in translucent plastics. But she bought one anyways, solely because it comes in translucent orange. She also wants an iBook, again in translucent orange. And she is disappointed that we bought the original iMac--not because the newer ones are more powerful and feature DVD and the iMovie software package, but because the new ones also come in (you guessed it) translucent orange.
Colored plastics appeal to folks like my wife. And people like my wife potentially have hundreds of millions (collectively) that they are more likely to spend on a translucent orange (or blue, or green, or whatever) computer than they are on one which only comes in drab beage, or worse: looks like it was designed by the same people who designed the Death Star or Darth Vader's helmet.
It looks like the cases that are being pimped by AMD aren't just iMac-ish colors on a stock IBM PC case. If that was illegal, then ColorCase would have been shut down ages ago.
Apple, no matter how much they would like it, doesn't have a copyright on "clear colored plastic".
And besides, the only thing that looks like an iMac on that C|Net page was the monitor, not the other components. The only issue here would be the shape of the monitor, and that can be done away with without destroying the overall effect of the case. I would be amazed if Apple won this one.
aÍÍ©ÍÌÍ£Ì'̽ͩÌÍzÍYÌÍÌY
That's right, I said good for Apple!
Apple had a potentially great design idea. (although the execution of the iMac sucked in a lot of ways) Other companies should be free to borrow some ideas and innovate with that information, but they shouldn't be allowed to rip off ideas directly.
In other words, if you look at a machine and think, "Hey--looks like Apple has a new machine out!" then they've violated Apple's trademark/patent rights. If you look at a machine and think, "Hey--looks like they stole Apple's design!" then they've violated Apple. If you look at a machine and think, "Hey--looks like they didn't have many original ideas" then things start to get grey. Of course, if you look at a machine and think, "Now THAT'S a unique design!" then they're obviously in the clear. Unless Apple disagrees, in which case you go to court.
Honestly, Apple came up with one of the only original not-a-beige-box ideas available, and nobody's had enough creativity to figure out that different design doesn't HAVE to mean rounded corners, transluscent colours, and friendly logos just like Apple's.
Here's the short test: Is this company's design riding on the coattails of Apple? In my mind, the answer is YES!
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Personally, I buy my computers in black rackmount cases with lots of fans.
Be used to use it all the time.
Hence the 'BeBox'.
I've heard it elsewhere as well.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff
First of all, Hemos, will you _please_ get over your hatred of Apple and stop posting sarcastic anti-Apple comments on the front page of /.?
When are you ever going to follow up on that "More coming soon..." comment you made on the front page a while back? Did you decide not to follow up when it turned out you were wrong about Apple in that case?
Now, of course Apple is considering action against FishPC. The designs are similar enough to cause confusion - however, Apple has not YET sued them (see, Hemos, the reason they aren't suing AMD is because they AREN'T SUING FishPC yet, if they ever will!)
However, Apple has not filed suit and in this case, I don't think they will. They don't have a great chance of winning, because it isn't standalone, even though the monitor does remind me of an iMac. Moreover, the pricing structure on the thing places its cost way above what you can get an iMac (I think.. dunno AU->US conversion rates).
Any major company's legal department is going to be eagle-eyed in watching for infringement.. what about LucasFilms and THX and Dr. Dre? Everyone still likes Star Wars.
Apple has come a very long way in the past couple years. They have an entire Open Source operating system available, are basing their next generation Mac OS on that Open Source operating system (and for those of you who complain it's not GPL, there's a reason. You can't mix GPL and proprietary software).. a UNIX, for god's sake.
They use industry standard parts.. IDE, PCI, AGP, SDRAM, etc - have led the way with USB (naysayers say what you will, but USB exploded with the advent of the iMac) and continue to implement Firewire, a digital video standard they invented, across the board.
They use IEEE 802.11, an open standard, to communicate wirelessly, when they could have developed some proprietary scheme.
Did you know that one of the first questions when Apple meets with a third-party hardware/software supplier is? "Can we release this?"... as in "Can we make this part of Darwin and release the source code to it?"
That's a big change for Apple.
You may not like the company because you grew up using PCs... I have never understood the vehement dislike those who grew up on PCs seem to have for the Mac. They constantly go on about the Mac being inferior and a toy and that there's more games or software, and that (once these people go from being MS zealots to Linux zealots) Apple is proprietary and they just want to steal our good ideas and so on and so forth...
Everywhere you turn, there are IT managers who have a dislike of Macs for no other reason than they don't understand them. That's what it boils down to. You hate what you don't understand.
Well, understand this: Apple is developing machines with industry standard parts implementing industry standard protocols designed to run an OS that is based on the tried and true BSD Unix heritage and is at the same time based on a core that is Open Source, and said core is even designed to run on Intel-compatibles.
The end of cloning was a blessing: the inferior quality machines Power Computing, Motorola and UMAX produced (I know they are, I've used and maintained them) were being sold into Apple's own base and killing off the company. No Apple, no MacOS, no clones. In the end the result would be the same.
Can't you see the writing on the wall? Apple is preparing for a new era -- PPC and Intel machines, an OS constantly improved via Open Source development -- it doesn't matter if the Linux zealots join in.. there are other developers out there -- and is leading a charge that is masterfully executed.
The iMac is Apple's cash cow. You people seem more concerned about plastics than freedom of code, something Apple has shown a renewed commitment to on its Darwin listservs. You should join in sometime and find out how this company is changing itself for the better.
Stop blinding yourselves with learned rage. Look honestly at what Apple has done over the past two years and tell me that they have done nothing good. If you can tell me that, you have no clue where the future of the desktop is going.
...which looks nothing like the iMac other than being colorful. It's not all-in-one, even the monitor looks to be one of those rather expensive LCD ones rather than a CRT. The one in the pic on that page doesn't even use translucency (that I can tell - I could be wrong).
I could see if it was all-in-one, translucent, and roughly gumdrop-shaped (like the iMac), or a tower with those gawd-awful "handles" all over it, translucent, with a drop-down motherboard tray.(like the g3/g4 series) I don't see where Apple can sue over a simply "colorful" computer design. - else we're all stuck with beige for eternity.
From a design standpoint I can't see how any transluscent computer MUST be an iMac ripoff. Those eMachines were one-piece knockoffs that look a lot like the iMac, but the FishPC and the AMD are strikingly original (well the AMD is, if that is the original) and the CD player is really cool, but they have colored clear plastic so Apple is getting its collective underwear into a bunch. I doubt AMD is going to give two shits about the FishPC, they actually make great hardware at good prices that sell regardless what they look like.
When technology companies talk about protecting their patents who thinks colored plastic panels? Is this all Apple has going for it? Sure sounds like it. These beige boxes are in desperate need of a new design and the industry doesn't need Apple crying foul everytime theres clear plastic involved. Hey Apple, make computers not cases and you might go far.
Well put, computers look the way they do because of office lighting regulations. Do people like slashdot-terminal live in an modernist like office building with florescent lighting, handicap accesible bathrooms, and cubicles instead of walls? Doubt it, people by nature gravitate towards aestheticly pleasing shapes and colors. Computers are cheap and disposable consumer goods they might as well look good and when they do people react. Especially when this thing is going to be sitting wide open in their home. Its sad that the current crop of good looking electronic cases aren't much appreciated by typical males or so called power-users because our society's macho and intellectual ideals put a taboo on art and expression leaving the market open for women (my girlfriend has this green cellphone) and artists (this graphic desiner loves the new cases) etc.
Maybe slashdot-terminal drives a black model-t around and wears the same suit everyday, but most people demand more than plain looking appliances and from the looks of things, they're coming. Better stockpile those beige cases, cause once people start getting a decent choice in cases and peripherals there ain't gonna be anymore made.
Yes, I know that the slashdot gang gets many article submitions but they could at least read the the one they're gonna post.
I've been told that the case is actually AMD's
EasyNow! design - thanks to Chris Tom for the head's-up. Wonder why they aren't suing AMD?
This almost sounds like inside info, yet anyone who read the article saw this and its hyperlink. Maybe you should hire Chris Tom to do your proof reading. I wouldn't care but this shit happens all too often usually with misleading titles and summaries. Read one for the Gipper.
(MM note: I don't care if you mark this down, I've got karma to spare.)
I sincerely hope this is a troll. The dated idea that "women like pretty colourful things" just because of their sex is an idea that I find to be offensive in the extreme.
/.) don't have any asthetic taste to speak of. (I mean, come on: do we all really want computers that look like they were ripped off the bridge of the Death Star?)
:-)
It was not.
It was, however, a recognition that perhaps men (and the geeks here on
Oh, and by the way: I upgraded my Palm (an old 512K model) to a Visor. In green...
Both - Apple has targetted their PR on mass media stuff (mostly movies and TV), with fairly good results. I believe they have given iMacs and other machines to studios for free in exchange for a few seconds of exposure. In some cases, an Apple product has played a very prominent role in various films (Jurassic Park, Mission Impossible, etc).
I'm still trying to figure out how Apple got Open Transport - their networking architecture - to interface with the alien mothership in Independence Day. At the time, OT truly sucked, and it was hard enough to get it to work on terrestrial networks. All this, and they chose to spotlight the Powerbook 5300, possibly the worst laptop Apple has ever made.
Anyhow, there is also a pretty strong contingent of Mac people in the graphic arts field, as well as Hollywood in general. Script writers, directors, actors, etc. I'm not sure what the percentage is, but it's probably a lot higher than the rest of the world at large. I imagine that they have so many Macs laying around, they make good props.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff
Silly human. Anyone who truly groks cats knows that the cat owns the hacker, and not the reverse. They allow us to share their homes because we can operate the canopener and clean out the litterbox. Cats were worshipped as gods in ancient Egypt; they have never forgotten this fact.
"The axiom 'An honest man has nothing to fear from the police'
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?