Slashdot Mirror
More Photoshopped Evidence In Apple v. Samsung
jfruhlinger writes "It seems that Apple can't stop Photoshopping evidence in its EU lawsuit against Samsung. We already saw that the company used trickery in its side-by-side comparison of the iPad and Galaxy Tab; now it appears that it's fudging the comparison between the iPhone and Galaxy S as well."
It is a flat screen with icons. No, you didn't think it up first. Now sit back down.
They were two separate pictures (the other site photoshopped them together and indicates they did so).
If I go to a site showing automobiles, is the picture of the Fiat 500 barely visible because a picture of a Toyota Sequoia is on the same page and they have to be to scale?
Come on, stop reaching here.
The pictures were to show the devices are substantially similar, not to show scale.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
...are lawyers.
They also rearranged the Galaxy S's home screen so that it'd look more like the iPhone. Apple, I mean, not Samsung.
Go ahead, take a look at the real thing. That looks nothing like an iPhone.
For one thing, it supports widgets, which the iPhone doesn't. (Apparently the idea that people might want to get weather information on their phone still evades Apple.)
Another good hint is the home button on the screen Apple's using, which probably doesn't appear on the home screen.
But you're not trying to prove that the sequoia copied the fiat. This is the equivalent of fiat making their small, cheap car look as spacious as the largest toyota in an add. Except, there it'd be false advertising, here, its falsifying evidence.
It's not just about scale - that, as you say, is forgiveable - it's about aspect ratio. They made the Samsungs look more like the Apples by squashing their dimensions differently, changing their shape in the process. That isn't exactly cool, as I'm sure you would agree.
If you're claiming that two items are nearly identical and then to do so you show a picture of them the same size when they are significantly different sizes. then yes it is a problem.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
the flaw in your argument here is that apple's images had icons that were the correct aspect ratio but the shape was wrong. if the image was just squashed, the icons would be squashed as well.
when one is accusing the other of copycatting then yes it should be realistically represented, the scaled image does make samsung look nearly identical in shape and size, which IS a major selling point on the iphone. In the real world there is a noticeable difference.
reaching would be apple thinking they invented glossy round web2.0 icons, and how dare anyone arrange them on a grid!
When the judge made his decision, he had a powered-up iPad and a powered-up Galaxy tab in front of him, so he could see for himself whether they were similar - at least according to the BBC. If he thinks Samsung is in the wrong after playing with a physical working device, what does it matter if one image shows the aspect ratio incorrectly ? (all of the other images in the brief clearly showed the different aspect ratios).
Oh, it makes good link-bait ? You don't say!
Simon.
Physicists get Hadrons!
So they are saying they've "innovated" the mobile device sector for inventing handhelds with rounded corners and big screens. Well, how does that hold up to their first iPhone looking strikingly similar to Nokia's MID (at that time already being their third generation handheld none the less!)?
Apple is not that innovative, they just have better marketing - which they now can leverage for sueing their competition (I'm sure every judge has heard of the iPhone, I doubt the same is true for Nokia's Maemo devices)
apparently Apple or Samsung has patented the form factor. Why else would this be worth reading or commenting upon?
It's psychological. Cover up the real image and look at the two, and then cover up the altered one and look at the two. You'll notice that the phones look significantly more similar in all aspects when comparing with the altered one.
What I like is how the angled side view touches the bottom red line despite not being straight up. The iPhone has the proper space below the red line. Physics be damned.
In add... lying (photoshopped image) is OK. In a lawsuit.... I do not think so. Apple should get their asses whacked.
Apple is a scumbag company who will (try to) roll right over any customers or companies they have a problem with.
Oh wait. that's not news. It just never really worked for them until they got big.
And NOW i'm supposed to care? lol...
This article is about the resized (keeping aspect ratio correct) Galaxy S versus iPhone.
And yes, the icons in the Galaxy Tab pic were squashed. Look at the clock icon in the Galaxy Tab picture. It's supposed to be circular, it is not.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
thanks for the info kdawson. didnt know what a virus was until now. your the best.
Give Apple some credit, I'd say that if their lawyers doctored evidence then they would have at least put some effort into making it look genuine. The Galaxy S II has a display ratio of 3:5, while the iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4 have a ratio of 2:3. Apple's evidence certainly doesn't seem to back up the real data.
"The most dangerous enemy of a better solution is an existing codebase that is just good enough." -- Eric S. Raymond
It's not just about scale - that, as you say, is forgiveable - it's about aspect ratio. They made the Samsungs look more like the Apples by squashing their dimensions differently, changing their shape in the process. That isn't exactly cool, as I'm sure you would agree.
That was true in the German case but not in this (the Netherlands) one, Apect ratio was not noticably affected. That said, I disagree that you can honestly show how similar two items are by removing elements that are different (in this case the size).
Samsung went to some lengths to make the grid view look more like iOS. But really, it's a grid of rounded icons. Big. Freaking. Deal.
HEY APPLE, some users might appreciate it if you started ripping off some Android design elements. Like widgets. But hey glad to see you've at least gotten around to copying the notification area, complete with the whole swipe gesture and all.
So you (Apple) found a convenient technology called touch screen?
Sucks you didn't invent it first, then you could patent it and tell other companies "Be creative, think of another, convenient way to replace buttons."
It does suck...but I guess you're also lucky the people who did invent it didn't patent it.
They probably said to themselves, "I can't patent this, that would be like patenting the shape of a cup."
Stupid them, because you know, that if you thought of the cup first, you would have patented that right away and told other companies to "be creative" and think of another, more convenient way to hold liquids for drinking.
We understand how you feel Apple, these evil Samsung guys, they stole your idea!
How dare them make a phone that is NOT the same shape as yours!?
How dare them get rid of all buttons except for maybe 2 or 3 that are conveniently placed where the thumb and index fingers of the person who's holding it are located!?
YOU PATENTED CONVENIENCE, HOW DARE THEM TAKE YOUR IDEA!
YOU MUST ACT NOW, SUE THEM APPLE, SUE THEM!
OR ELSE OTHER COMPANIES WILL FOLLOW SUIT AND START DOING THINGS THAT ARE CONVENIENT FOR THEM (MMS, COPY AND PASTE, A DOCK OR TASK BAR' WITH CONVENIENT PROGRAMS THAT ARE USED OFTEN) AND CALL IT REVOLUTIONARY?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
No he got the link wrong. The right link is here.
http://saveie6.com/
Yes, his the best.
These so-called Community Designs (I'm an ugly American, what do I know) need another stringent test in order to be considered a reasonable restriction on the market: Did the tools and technology to implement a design already exist, such that anyone could have readily "invented" the same design, or did the design require the initial invention of tools and technology necessary to implement the design itself, in a fashion similar to the work of Charles Babbage?
Apple's designs don't pass that test, do they?
So, you have to wonder...
Whose bright idea was it to spam slashdot with fake AV ads? I'm just guessing here, but I think there's more people here who have maimed lusers for installing fake AV software than who are gullible enough to fall for it themselves!
Is Apple becoming Microsoft?
* Carthago Delenda Est *
Tablets, before and after
That isn't exactly cool, as I'm sure you would agree.
The Admin and the Engineer
One multi-billion dollar company suing another. Anyone taking sides here is a tool.
Then yes, Toyota would have a case. The relative size doesn't matter really. If it's similar, it's similar.
If the pics were shown to make a point of the interior space, then it would be misleading. If it were to show similarity of design, it wouldn't be misleading.
In this case, the pics were to show similarity of design, not size.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
+4 Misinformative?
From TFA for those that can't be bothered to read:
But the picture of purported Galaxy S has been resized about 6%, making the Galaxy S appear smaller and more similar to Apple's phone. The height of the purported Galaxy S that Apple displays matches the iPhone exactly. The aspect ratio has not been measurably altered.
Finally an objective test to see if you're an Apple fanboi. If you think there is nothing wrong with skewing the aspect ration in a court filing, you're a fanboi, period.
Troll that was nasty.
The real link is HERE!
Cheaters never win...unless of course their multi-billion-dollar multi-national corporations. In this case, carry on...
If I go to a site showing automobiles, is the picture of the Fiat 500 barely visible because a picture of a Toyota Sequoia is on the same page and they have to be to scale?
It's interesting you bring up cars, because there's plenty of cases in the trade where size matters. For example, the check-chart (I forget if it has a funny spelling) book that has all the engine silhouettes has them all to scale. And more to the point, frame drawings are shown with a 1:1 aspect ratio, because nothing else makes sense...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Even in that pics they have all the tablets after the iPad in portrait position which is misleading. I mean look at most cellphones. for the most part they all look very similar. Having rounded edges and the screen taking up most of the face of the device shouldn't be able to pass as IP some things are going to be a natural advance with withever gadget you might be talking about.
Facebook?
That picture is selective. Not all tablets looked like that pre-ipad. For example, take a look at my old visionplate: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y104/tibman/VisionPlate/DSCN0921.jpg
Looks almost exactly like an Ipad.. except it predates the ipad by many years.
http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
The lawsuits aren't stupid, they're a (imo) desperate attempt to keep history from repeating itself.
In the 1980's, Apple seemed to have it all, only to have their flagship gadget elbowed into a niche as soon as the windows PC was capable of doing pretty much the same things, but at a more affordable price, and offering a more open platform both for software development and hardware vendors. At the time, Apple sued Microsoft for stealing their 'look and feel', but lost. It turns out, you can't patent or copyright a 'look and feel'. (Unless the competition starts using an apple for a logo, or simply copying the hardware and software. This is common enough, in China you can buy devices that are basically iPhones, presumably made in the same factory, except for the Apple logo. You get those separately in the form of stickers you can apply yourself if you want).
Even though Apple's claim is obviously true: Samsung obviously made these gadgets deliberately similar to the corresponding Apple product in order to compete in the same high margin market segment, I doubt a new series of 'look and feel' lawsuits is going to be more successful.
Right now, the prices are similar, but soon enough the Android devices will start to become cheaper. I will not be surprised if 15 or 20 years from now, Apple will be a fancy niche player, falling further and further behind their Asian competitors and their Google OS. Larry Page taking the place of Bill Gates as the most hated evil business man on the internet.
I tried to tell her it's not about scale but aspect ratio but she said it just doesn't feel the same :(
Wow. I enjoyed your link.
I never accepted tablets that imitating Star Trek technology had to look so awfully different. Just look at all the handles and purposeless bumps on the frame, plus all the wasted space and buttons.
But then I look at the Windows logo on the top tablets. It's evidence that those were kludges meant to run a full-featured Windows OS, assigning a stylus to do nearly all input (and the more alien handles and margin buttons as another kludge to fix the limitations of the stylus-only push). The hidden, rotating keyboards also made them bulky, heavy and probably justified the $2000 pricetags that came with them prior to the advent of modern iPhone/Google-based smartphones with touchscreens
They did that for the Tab (in just one image out of hundreds of pages?). They didn't do it for the Galaxy S, which is what this story is about and which is what the person you're responding to was talking about.
According to Samsung, the dimensions of the Galaxy S are 122.4 x 64.2 mm.The iPhone 3G measures 115.5 x 62.1 mm
I think you have some gaping security holes there...
Apple has provided flawed visual evidence of similarities between the iPhone 3G and Samsung's Galaxy S smartphones to the District Court in The Hague, an investigation by Webwereld.nl, a Dutch IDG publication, has found.
I have an LG optimus S and it has the same shape, and so do hundreds of other smartphones and they have for years.
If anything they look totally different because apple products have that stupid square button and everyone else has a useful amount of buttons and things on them.
One important point point the article missed is that apple is shit.
Look at 5 different 4 door economy sedans from a distance. How about 5 different luxery sedans? 5 Different pickups?
:)
That covers the car analogy angle as well.
If it looks similar in ornamentation and provides the same functionality, it is in conflict.
It'd be difficult to argue the devices don't provide the same functionality based upon a 10% size difference.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Wrong story. Read TFA.
Apple just didn't feel that the evidence that it was submitting against Samsung was pretty enough; it really required photoshopping to be acceptable.
They did it for their iPad Star-Trek ads: http://i.imgur.com/huWri.jpg
They probably figure if it's subtle enough, they can get away with it, but most people won't notice.
"I think it would be a good idea" Gandhi, on Western Civilisation
If you can't figure out how to scale a photo without Photoshop, you truly are ignorant.
Are accounts allowed to do this kind of spam? This is the second time I've seen this spam as one of the first submissions.
Annoying.
It's one thing to scale the images maintaining aspect ratio. However, if you stretch the image to try to argue that (for example), the Ford Taurus and the new VW are clones, you have crossed the line into fraud.
Did you even look at the picture in TFA? Note how much the middle phone (the shopped Samsung image) looks like the iPhone and how much it does NOT look look like an un-shopped image of the Samsung to the right.
Especially when you also choose a non-default background image and icon arrangement
I don't know what a virus is
I've got better things to do tonight than die.
Damn IT... I Intended to have a SARCASM TAG, but /. kinda fucked uped on me and removed it...
The point is, yeah, Mr kdawson, I know how to operate a computer, been doing that since 1979, please thank you, come again
(Go soft on me, I was only 8 at the time)
I've got better things to do tonight than die.
I'd look at the SmartQ series of tablets too. They look a lot like the iPad, but have been around for a lot longer (and are a lot cheaper, although the specs are pretty anaemic).
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
My best,
-kdawson
Here is what Apple copied. What I don't understand is why is it that Apple followers wont admit it in the face of actual evidence. Seems irrational.
Er. NIce try. But if you care to know the truth you can see that the idea that Apple invented that look is false.
Unfortunately you still have that virus. It posts Spam for fake AV on Slashdot.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Here's a ' you can copy and paste since your keyboard seems defective.
Gebus, never heard of wikipedia, it's got everything, A virus is a small infectious agent that can replicate only inside the living cells of organisms. Most viruses are too small to be seen directly with a light microscope. Viruses infect all types of organisms, from animals and plants to bacteria and archaea.[1] Since Dmitri Ivanovsky's 1892 article describing a non-bacterial pathogen infecting tobacco plants bla bla bla... Apparently these invisible "agents" ha ha "invisible", can infect your computer, much like fungus and mold in my coffee cup.
"The Galaxy S, introduced in The Netherlands in July 2010, is both taller and wider than the iPhone 3G."
Soooo, they showed the two pieces of promotional material (not a photo of the two devices) side by side for comparison. What's the issue? They would have had to scale the promotional material from whatever size it was originally in anyway.
Complete non story.
We called it a Mobile back then, and we liked it's 280-degree turning ability, and lack of a roof meant is was stable as the first Window-less but still a little Buggy if you ran your office from it, but at least it was more stable than Microsoft Windows with their Office.
Now get out of my Right of Way!
Apple is extremely popular and extremely successful by most standards. I doubt anyone here can deny that, so I will end this paragraph here and move on to the next paragraph.
Apple is great at creating an image that is appealing and meaningful. (I omit truthful and factual from my statement intentionally) Apple is just doing what Apple does best. The problem here is that they are presenting their appealing and meaningful images to courts of law where inaccuracies for the purpose of convincing people are also known as lies, perjury, deceit, or misdirection. The standards for advertising and marketing are most definitely lower than those of evidence used in court... or at least it should be.
A few weeks ago, I was struggling to get rid of a particularly frustrating virus. It wouldn't go away unless I paid the creators $8000! I tried every possible anti-virus software, but to no avail. That's when I discovered newegg.com .I threw my old computer in the dumpster and ordered a new one from newegg.com and to my surprise, It was virus-free.
Newegg.com is outstanding! My new computer is running faster than ever! The dumpster solution totally cleaned up my system and increased my speed! Newegg.com came through with flying colors where no one else could!
If you're having computer problems, I wholeheartedly suggest that you throw that old infected PC in the dumpster. Millions of people have already done so, and all are satisfied. If you're like me, then you'll want to get a new PC from Newegg.com.
Even if you're not experiencing any visible problems with your computer, you could still be at risk, Does you computer talk smack?. That's why experts all over the world recommend pitching that PC in the dumpster (computer virus can be spread to humans) and get a new, clean computer from Newegg.com.
Newegg.com was not responsible for this post.
This case should be dismissed with prejudice. Apple is fabricating and/or tampering with evidence in order to get a judgment in their favor, how can any of their evidence be trusted now? Not only should the case be dismissed, but Apple should be forced to pay for Samsungs legal fees and time as well a the court costs, and if there's any precedence, they should have to pay a hefty fine. And by hefty, I'm talking in the millions of dollars. Something that will hurt. If any of this evidence was produced by someone who was under oath, they should be up on charges, and not just Contempt of Court. There is absolutely no excuse that would justify something like this.
Of course, this is America. Nothing, other than the evidence maybe being thrown out. Hell no. Nothing will happen to the Cooperate Overlords.
--- Keep the choice with the user..
you stole my freaking clownsong
honk honk
Yes, they also reconfigured the Tab from it's default settings to make it look more like the Apple products.
They both pretty much looks like an Amstrad PenPad without lid b.t.w.
Looks like handheld devices have not changed design much in 18 years.
I would probably attribute this to human error, rather than genuine maliciousness. Its entirely possible to fuck the size of an image up like that using ^C^V and then replacing the source image in any word processing application. Go try it in word if you don't believe me.
If someone handed the dumbest person they can find both phones would the person know the difference? If yes, case closed. See, who needs costly courts and lawyers when idiot tests work just fin?. For the record I never once confused my wife's Galaxy S phone with the iPhone. Amazingly I could tell them apart even when they were sitting right next to each other. The first noticeable difference is that the Galaxy S has a much bigger screen and way brighter/sharper than pre-iPhone 4. Also one had a big circular button at the bottom. So even when off I could magically tell them apart.
The design of the iPhone or the iPad was/is not unique. I'll give Apple the circular button in the middle, but the rest is merely progress in an obvious way. The HP TC 1100 was 7 years before the iPad and while heavier and a bit thicker is 7 years before the iPad. There have been plenty of candy bar style phones pre iPhone as well. The LG Prada comes to mind which I believe was released a few months before the original iPhone and announced in 2006. Next people will tell me if Apple makes a mini phone that they invented that as well. I can tell you now there have been plenty of those alreaady, they just tended to not be super successful.
I feel like we need a full discosure thing like when analysts come on MSNBC or something.
Household has:
iPhone, iPad, Macbook Pro, Kindle, Samsung Galaxy S, Droid X, Sony Vaio Z, custom desktop computer running Windows (ancient) , linux laptop (old)
Plans to purchase:
nothing
Which makes the lawyers idiots.
Had the fricking judge the two damned phones. Instead of being whiney bitches Samsung's lawyers need to say, "yes your honour.. here why dont you see the actual devices" which will make apple look really bad to the judge when he sees the real thing does not match the images.
Instead Samsungs lawyers whine like 8 year olds. Take advantage of this!
Apple needs to be careful proffering false evidence, fraudulently, to an EU court.
The EU can and will impose hefty x BIL ISD fines for a corp. doing this.
Falsifying evidence, perjury; I bet a regular citizen might face prison time for that sort of thing.
really sick of /. now--sick of this website spewing bullshit, from the "editorials" to the posts. Bye.
You are SO getting a Karma virus.
The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
On July 12, 2011, The head of the patent portfolio at apple, Richard Lutton left, without so much as an explanation. Maybe he was behind the photoshoping and was forced to resign, maybe he did not agree with the photoshoping, and quit before he would get tarnished....
From:
http://money.canoe.ca/money/business/international/archives/2011/07/20110712-084412.html
Apple is engaged in an expanding web of litigation concerning smartphone patents, mostly with phonemakers using Google's rival Android software, and it was unclear why Richard "Chip" Lutton Junior, who manages the iPhone maker's patent portfolio, is leaving the company.
*** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
Did you even read the caption in TFA?
"The complaint is only available for viewing at the court in The Hague. Due to these restrictions, Webwereld has made a rendering of Apple's flawed evidence to present the findings visually."
This isn't Apple's image, any measurement of tiny differences or similarities is moot, because some artist made the image you're basing it on. The article also says the aspect ratio was not altered.
You saw Apple's image?
The one in the article is not Apple's image.
"The complaint is only available for viewing at the court in The Hague. Due to these restrictions, Webwereld has made a rendering of Apple's flawed evidence to present the findings visually."
If you're going to complain about icon sizes, you need to blame some Webwereld artist.
All of these "look and feel" lawsuits should be outlawed. I heard a story about such a lawsuit over the control\s of a car. It was in the very early days of the car industry and there were many different ways of controlling a car. Some cars used a tiller stick similar to many small sailboats. Others used a combination of sticks which can still be seen in some bulldozers. And then there was the steering wheel. The public liked that and other car companies duplicates the "look and feel" of the steering wheel but implemented it in different ways. The original company tried to sue in court but was unsuccessful.
Can you imagine the chaos if every brand of cars had to be controlled in a completely different way? Computer and other device should take this lesson to heart. Order is what makes a market thrive. Computer on whether your device is intrinsically better. Spend those dollars (or euros) on making your product better.
The second from last sentence should be...
"Compete on whether your device is intrinsically better. "
The spell checker came up and I accidentally clicked of the wrong choice.
Mea culpa! ("My fault" for those who do not know Latin.)
He is commenting on the earlier ipad vs Samsung galaxy pad news (2 days ago) where Apple changed the aspect ratio of the S pag to match the ipad, this is a follow up story to that to show more allegations of tampering di you not read the headline ? Notice link to previous story
"It seems that Apple can't stop Photoshopping evidence in its EU lawsuit against Samsung. We already saw that the company used trickery in its side-by-side comparison of the iPad and Galaxy Tab; now it appears that it's fudging the comparison between the iPhone and Galaxy S as well."
For someone not technically inclined but also not ready to give up their DVD, having something shipped to their door that solves the problem may be worth the price. For those that want to, the instructions are readily available (Search for "create lion installation disk") from reputable sites.
Give me a break. Tablets that resemble an iPad existed in SciFi movies and real life way before iPad even existed. This is a clear case of Apple pulling legal bullshit to make the market uncompetitive to them and frankly, this sort of thing was never meant to happen when people drafted patent and other laws. Fanboy's just don't like to admit that Apple is a big greedy corporation without good ethics, regardless if they make good products. If the iPad is so superior, then people would buy it instead of the other tablets anyway.
That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
The problem is the judge did not even hear Samsung's case at all when they issued their ruling. The EU is a big joke.
That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
If Apple is fudging evidence (and we all know about photographic manipulation), then they should be firmly taught a lesson about doing this sort of thing. Suspend sales of all Apple products in the EU for say 3-5 years (the number of years equal to the number of times they have tried the same stupid trick). And make it cumulitive (If they fiddled with a photo in two places, that counts as two. I they fiddled with a second photo three times, add three. If they try to submit another fiddled photo the next week, and it has another two 'manipulations', then add another two to make it seven, etc.). At some point, they will either learn to play fair and compete on equal terms, or they will be handed very unequal terms. If they don't learn after one or two 'terms', then a longer term ban on their products might give them a sobering sense of reality. I'm very tired of companies hiding behind patents, and legal crap like this to gain an unfair monopoly.
For those that want to, the instructions are readily available (Search for "create lion installation disk") from reputable sites.
Yes - I know all about that and it Worked For Me. So, the question is, why didn't Apple stick a nice friendly "Create Lion Installation Disk" button in the installer? That would make it useful for people who are quite capable of inserting a blank DVD but not technical enough to dig inside an app bundle and find an obscurely-named .dmg file. Instead, you have to remember to stop the installer auto-running because it deletes itself after a successful install. Then you're back on Google trying to find out how to get the App Store to let you re-download it.
Anyway, that's my home machines sorted out - now, there's the 3 people at work for whom I will, at some time in the future, need to purchase Lion for - legitimately. Currently the options seem to be: (a) Bulk licensing: $29 per seat - sounds fine but minimum order 20 seats - and you still get to download and make your own disc, or (b) buy 5 USB sticks at $69 a pop or (c) buy everybody a $30 iTunes voucher and get them to buy it on their personal App Store accounts (which is fine until someone leaves, or gets upgraded, and you want to pass their Mac on to someone else). None of them are totally unworkable, but it doesn't make life easy - Apple clearly have forgotten their roots in the garage and subscribed to the "Small business = less than 100 employees" nonsense (plus, lots of people in large businesses will have relatively small, often self-supporting, groups of Mac users).
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
Oh shit, it's 6% bigger, this changes EVERYTHING! Seriously, if the court case wasn't considered bunk before, why is *this* nugget changing everyone's minds?
Looks completely different to even the white iPad, too me.
I think Palm had "black slab touchscreen tablets" covered in the mid 90's.
Do you really want to play that game?
Palm Pilot (~1996)
Able Neutron Massage Pod (~1993)
...and, of course, the real motherlode, like half of modern personal computing, dates back to PARC in the 70s and the Dynabook which probably did influence Apple - but would not otherwise have seen the light of day, and Apple paid for access to the PARC work (hope Xerox held on to those shares).
...but you'd need some real photoshopping to make any of them look like an iPad.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
Unlike Android-blinded fans, my first instinct regarding "Photoshopped evidence" in the Apple-Samsung patent case is to be skeptical of "crackpot conspiracy theories."
Instead, my initial thoughts are that an amateur's Photoshop skills and an extremely poor document editing workflow probably resulted in innocent mistakes.
Adobe Photoshop is complicated software. As a professional photographer, I can tell you that scaling images, incorrect size and resolution calculations, and accidentally 'stretched' images are among the most common Photoshop production mistakes I see over and over again in publishing — by both amateurs and even inexperienced or poorly-trained 'professionals'. In today's digital world, these types of problem images easily can be found in many online and printed documents. Usually (though certainly not always) they are the work of earnest, but unskilled amateur desktop publishers, photographers and graphic artists who just don't understand how to control of Photoshop's complex tools.
Furthermore, it does not seem likely that highly-trained Photoshop artists are preparing files for the legal documents presented in this case, which may well be a stupid mistake if true. We may learn that the graphics are being prepared by departmental assistants at Apple or legal clerks who may well have inadequate (if any) Photoshop training, or we may discover that deceit is at work. The point is — we don't know at this time.
Apple is a first-class company with high ethical standards. The last time a company copied Apple's intellectual property — the Mac OS — Apple's legal case was undone by poorly-written contracts that ultimately allowed Microsoft to get away with the unethical (and otherwise illegal) behavior. I believe Apple's past experience, and the fact that the stakes in this patent lawsuit are so high — are indications that Apple executives, employees and attorneys would not knowingly put the legal case at risk by fabricating evidence. And given the patents that Apple holds, it doesn't make sense that Apple would encourage such a plan.
That said, my second instinct is to acknowledge that anything is possible in today's world and that misguided people do make errors in judgement and even knowingly commit illegal acts. Is fabricated evidence possible? Yes. Does it seem likely? Not really. Should the case be dismissed with prejudice? It's appropriate for good defense lawyers to raise questions about the veracity of any evidence submitted to the court. However, neither public opinion nor prejudiced, know-it-all Android fans popping off in meaningless Internet discussion forums play a role in this legal process. After all, we're only hearing one side of the story. An able judge will determine the fairness of the evidence.
It seems fair that these particular documents would be disallowed as evidence and that a pattern of subterfuge and evidentiary deceit would warrant dismissing a case. However, I hope that common but innocent mistakes — if proven — would not rise to the level of destroying Apple's case. That doesn't sound like justice.
this wallpaper says that could be downloaded from art.gnome.org ages ago: http://animewallpapers.lt/Anime-wallpapers/1600x1200/GNOME-Can-ThinkDifferent-1600x1200-31696p.html
One is small, one is far away.
http://www.itworld.com/sites/default/files/iPhone_vs_Galaxy-600.jpg
That looks nothing like an iPad. Clearly, however, you are too stupid to understand that. I suggest you kill yourself ridding the world of your stupidity.
If that looks nothing like an iPad then neither does the Galaxy S.
Like this
I much prefer the people with viruses just give me their computers. Dumpster diving is annoying, and it is so much easier when they just give the stuff away.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Palm pilot also had a flat touchscreen with icons for apps. Not that the resistive touchscreen was that good, you needed to use fingernail. You could have used the plastic stick but you already had lost it.
HP bought the palm stuff - it would have made more sense for google to buy that from HP? Did Palm patent a lot or was that too early?