Slashdot Mirror
iMac Clone Gets Sued
Jareth writes "Remember the iMac PC made by Future Power? Apparently Apple didn't like the idea of someone making money off of their design, so they are suing for damages. The story is over at Wired. "
Well, they can't win a case based upon "look & feel", but it'll be interesting to see how this turns out. Luckily, whoever invented the beige case isn't suing every computer manufacturer ever.
This case isn't quite as ludicruous as it seems. The iMac clone looks almost *exactly* like a real iMac. Let's face it, the iMac is an incredibly distinctive computer. And let's also face it, the company cloning the iMac's look is trying to leech off Apple's good trademark.
This is not the same as the "look and feel" lawsuits. There are only a tiny number of ways to implement a GUI. There are a nearly infinite number of ways to build a computer's case.
Did the Lotus 123 (IBM??) people win a lawsuit when someone stolen the "look & feel" of their spread sheet design?
"look && feel" This is stupid.
I think Coke~a~Cola should sue pepsi, and all beer manufacters for stealing the "look && feel" of their soft drink can.
"Hey they are using something we thought of to make a better product for the rest of the world, now we can't have that. The rest of the world doeesn't need a better product, if they do they can buy whatever the hell we give them for what ever the hell we feel like charging, and if anyone has a problem with this I will sue your ass and make some more cash off that".
Don't your just love big companies.
Maybe aquarium manufacturers should consider suing Apple on account of iMac?
Just a thought.
- Rainy
Pretty obvious you've never used one
Can't you read? Apple is trying to protect its intellectual property and brand name. How would BMW react if Ford released an exact replica of the Z3? This is a no-brainer, really.
I can't believe people are attacking Apple for suing over this. The iMac case design is an Apple trademark, and I am sure that they have design patents for it, too. There is no way that a company should be able to get away with just copying a design like this. It is the equivalent of somebody taking an automotive body designed by Ford and using on Chrysler products. Ford would be suing them in milleseconds.
Basically what Daewoo is doing is trying to steal from Apple - Apple has put a huge amount of resources into establishing the iMac as a recognized brand in the marketplace, and Daewoo is trying to rip off Apple's brand. This is the sort of thing 3rd world countries have been trying to do for decades - come out with a cheap knock-off of an American made product that has good acceptance in the world market.
Anybody who has access to a good library should take a look at the US Patent Gazette- the back is FULL of patents for designs of consumer products.
Daewoo should be sued for something like this - what they are doing is absurd.
Wasnt it Apple that started the Beige cases in the first place?
Also it was a loophole in a contract that caused Apple to lose against Microsoft in the "Look and Feel" case.
Apple has a case if they can proove "Trade Dress" in iMac's design wich is copywrite-able.
Trade Dress violations are where consumers might become confused or a brand might be diluted by a product that steals a Look or Feel.
apple sued MS over look and feel, that is very abstract. look at the pictures of the two machines. apple spent many a dollar on this design, and FP has basically copied it. from 20 feet away, at a quick glance it is hard to tell which is which. the probelem here revolves more around the fact that apples case is used for aesthetic reasons, not just functional. under our laws, 'copying' something that is soley functional(all of our beige boxes)isnt against the law, but when you have a design not soley built that way for function(the imac, the new g3's, most american cars, etc.), that design is protected. details of this can be found at news.com. they mentioned gucci protecting a design of thier watch. we all want to see new and innovative designs from pc manufacturers, but if this is the trend, then i guess all the mac users are right, apple will be the only innovator where the rest will follow.(if you think all these flat panel display models are innovative, look back a bunch of years to the 20th anniversary mac, they got us there too)
> whining can't replace real innovation
Grow a brain. Where is Future Power's innovation? Apple is constantly innovating but needs to defend itself against a pack of Wintel cloners with a long tradidion of theft and counterfeit. May the better innovator win.
Give me a break - Apple IS the innovator here with a nice new case design. Apple has always been a strong innovator in the personal computer industry, and much of what we use today is derived from other companies trying to keep pace with Apple's innovations.
You should be critcizing Daewoo for lack of innovation, not Apple.
Man, you're so full of shit. The consumer buys based on recognized brands. iMac is a very strong brand. The iMac clone is very easy to confuse with that brand.
Ask your teacher, what is "imitation gap".
And you know what? I'm FREE to break into your apartment and steal your computer. But unless I can sell your computer for a decent PRICE, it won't be worthwhile.
Yep, I can clearly see you have a fine grip on reality. Do you have a job? Do you do homework at your school (you are so clueless, you must be a student)? I suppose we're FREE to steal your work. Because after all, you should be spending time doing work instead of squabbling over people claiming your work as their own.
if some car manufacturer made a blatant copy of the new vw bug(and this case is a blatant rip-off) do you think vw would not take any action? Most of the appeal with the vw bug, as well as the imac, is the look. apple will win in court because futurepower is basically trying to deceive people into thinking this is an imac. if this was just a beige all-in-one machine nobody would have taken any notice.
Almost every car on the road looks very similar to any other car. if some car manufacturer made a blatant copy of the new vw bug(and this case is a blatant rip-off) do you think vw would not take any action? Most of the appeal with the vw bug, as well as the imac, is the look. I believe apple will win in court because futurepower is basically trying to deceive people into thinking this is an imac. if this was just a beige all-in-one machine nobody would have taken any notice.
Of course they asked for permission to use them in their Think different ads. IIRC, it was the first time ever that a company was given permission to use an Einstein mugshot in a commercial advertising campaign.
Apple's original idea is that a computer should be something that works with you not against you.
Apple didnt want people memorizing "Stupid" knowlege of arcane commands and methods to configure or work with your computer.
The end result is that people _CAN_ actualy use a computer that wouldnt ordinarily.
Sure its always best to be a master in whatever you persue, but this is the real world where real people do not have enough time in their short lives to become a master of everything. If they try, they usualy become a "master of none".
Sure, in a perfect world we should all be able to know enough about our cars to change our own transmissions... Sure we should all know how to cook meals fit for a king, sure we should all be masters of music and write a symphony...
I hope you get my point... Its great to be a master at something, but not everyone can be a master at everything nor should they. If everyone took the time to master ever detail about computers and had no interest about anything else, were would we get our cars fixed? How about if our plumbing goes bad?
want to eat out? hope you like raw meat...
Because something is easy to figure out and learn doesnt make it "Stupid". It makes it intuitive and probably elegant.
Its friendly interface is approachable allowing people to learn to use a computer without fear of arcane commands...
I would say a command line interface does more to "Hide" information and constrict learning for new users (Keeping them "stupid") than does a GUI.
Nothing personal; just the latest example...
To all the apologists who are arguing that Apple's design is not innovative: let me ask you this. Why is everyone going out of their way to copy it? It's much cheaper to use the prefab beige cases instead of making your own case. Or for that matter, why was the iMac such a huge success? After all, it's just like the G3 towers, only in a different case.
Maybe because an iMac costs 20%-30% more. Duh!
More damaging? One of the primary reasons Mac has been near the brink of death so many times in the last decade is because of GUI design. I highly doubt copying some case colours is going to hit them as hard as copying the integrated graphical environment did.
Do you mean "NEITHER is innovati(ve)..."?
S'pose someone walks into a store where iMac's are being sold. Is she immediately going to think, "Oh look! ADM terminals!"
Now s'pose someone walks into a store where this iMac clone is being sold. He's probably going to think, "Oh, there's one of those iMac's I've been hearing about. Wow, and it's only $799. Hmm, they added a floppy drive too!"
Don't be ridiculous, the trademark infringement is very clearcut in this case.
Woz is STILL at Apple. Apple is STILL innovating. And if what counts is what's on the inside and not the outer appearance, then why is Windows the number one OS in the universe?
Actually, USB works really well on the Mac, so even hubs are easy enough for Joe iMac. It really is just plug and play.
Honestly, there isn't really anything innovative about the iMac... Compaq was making all-in-one Presarios about 4 years ago... And Im sure they weren't the first... The only innovation in the iMac is a translucent case, and I hardly consider that innovative...
Lot of people like the design of the iMac, but they want legacy PC (to run their Word, Quicken or Alpha Centauri. Among "normal people", it is also common to use floppies.) So in the world of PC there was a gap (in the design).
While you're spending so much time figuring out how to set those little dipshit switches and jumpers just to get your sound card (or whatever) to work, I'll be actually getting useful work done that expands the sum of human knowledge.
You see past all the little things to make every one of our lives so much brighter. That's why I love you.
Apple doesn't need to expand their customers minds, what is need to do is help those customers expand their minds all by themselves by not getting in the way by requiring a user to know the difference between an IRQ and an I/O port.
That is so true. iMacs are good for our mental health. Not only do they come in five soothing colors, but all those little useless IRO and I/Q PC things just clutter the mind and eventually lead to neurosis.
I have an extremely high level of knowledge about computer systems, from mainframes down to the lowest-level desktop. I advise large organizations on technology purchases. When it came time to spend *my* money, I bought a Macintosh.
Yes brother! Amen!
My current Mac (7500) is now four years old, and runs the latest system software release (Mac OS X Server 1.0/BeOS 4.5/Mac OS 8.6/MkLinux DR3 QUAD-BOOT). The only upgrade it ever got was a 604/120 card for $19.99.
I am befuddled by your excellence.
Have you seen any four-year old 486/Pentium PC's running Windows 2000 effectively, or even *at all*?
No way! Won't happen! Gates is the antichrist. We hate him.
I love my iMac. We're so happy together.
What is inside doesn't mean only "learn lot of arcane commands", but also "why is it sooo sloowww".
I like people claiming that they don't want to know, how it works, but just use it and simultaneously hunting for new drivers what would fix the problems they constantly have.
"I think Coke~a~Cola should sue pepsi, and all beer manufacters for stealing the "look && feel" of their soft drink can."
h tml#develop
Well, they actually COULD SUE if they made bottles that looked like Coca-Cola's.
READ: http://www.gds.co.za/klerksdorp/coca-cola/origin.
Your university isn't the only provided with "cutting-edge technology". We have some Digital VXTs and lot of PC-XT. Yes, they are still in use (these terminals or nothing). CS budget? What it is???
Which is rather ironic, considering Lotus was a
complete and total rip of VisiCalc.
Just because the exterior looks similar to the iMac doesn't mean it's a clone. An iMac clone would perform the same (or close enough to) as an actual iMac. These new machines aren't even Macs for chrissake.
>I wonder if Future Powers machine has a round mouse too?
I wonder if they forgot the Floppy drive like Apple?
I know the floppy is old technology but they could have fitted a zip drive or something similair or even better a CD-RW!
>car that looked exactly like....
While they look extremely similair they are clearly different enough to be legal. No one is going to go into a PC supplier and walk out with one of these instead of an Imac as they are different OS`s.
It`s a sad day when a company like Apple shows that the most important aspect of its design is the colour of the plastic used in its case!
FWIW, the Apple II originally had a black case. The Apple II+, which was slightly more popular, had a rather dark brown casing. It wasn't until the Apple IIe that Apple used the "platinum" color scheme used up until the iMac.
Anonymous Apple Junkie
The second keyboard layout that IBM produced for the PCjr was ok. It didn't have the same tactile feel of their other keyboards, but the key size and layout was ok. I used mine for about six years.
"Good artists borrow; great artist steal" -Steve Jobs
I find it disappointing that any one would try to copy the iMac in such a manner. The iMac is more than a pretty box, it has ease of use written all over it, and a damn speedy processor under the hood. Daewoo not only tried to confuse customers by making the case so iMac-like, but went to little effort to copy the true innovations in the iMac.
Why does the crappy clone NEED a floppy drive anyway? Oh, I forgot, it's because Daewoo and Microsoft can't figure out how to make a descent boot CD. Also they can't figure out how to make USB a useful interface. Make a truly innovative PC and you'll find me in line with the rest of them, check in hand.
Anonymous Apple Junkie
well, has anyone _tried_ to sue the cheap cereal companies and lost? nope. Just because big cereal company A doesn't give a shit doesn't mean that it's legal, its all on them to sue the other companies. An iMac is a little bit more complicated than a corn pop (well, not really.)
Well, if Apple loses the case, Flaming Moe's for everyone, on the house!
I don't know why you're dissing Fisher-Price plastic. That stuff is indestructible! Think of all the kids that chew on those toys for *years* with little effect.
I wish my car was made of that.
Well, I'd prefer not to live in ignorance like many Mac users. I enjoy learning how my computer works and configuring it the way I prefer. At least that way when something goes wrong, I'll have an idea of how to fix/replace said part. It's kind of like owning a car. You can drive it while being totally oblivious to how it works. But when it comes time to fix something, you can do it yourself (or at least have some knowledge of what happened) or you can pay through the nose to some mechanic who may even rip you off because you knew nothing of the product you bought and why it broke down.
I think it's a extremely bad idea to have no underhood knowledge of an expensive piece of equipment you buy. Companies that cater to this kind of mentality only further encourage it and we wind up fostering more ignorant users. Oh, wait, I guess that gives people like me jobs! Never mind then! Forget what I said and continue to "get your work done" on that pretty little mac.
You assume he sucks the big company dick like you, how do you know he doesn't run a REAL operating system. Instead of this sissy mac shit or fucked up .EXE dos/win32 crap, Get a REAL OS whinny boy.
Spell Check this BITCH
I don't understand. Do you realize that computer companies spend ALOT of money on their case designs? And i'm not talking about the thousand dollar dollar range here.
If they were going for the absolute cheapest case, you'd probably have a box without ANY curves and punch holes in it.
Truth is, even these beige boxes - the case is the first thing you see. They all realize this, so pretty much everyone tries different designs to differentiate themselves.
Now this Future Power company comes along with some CAD software, copies the Apple design and sends it to manufacturing. Effectively getting maybe 15-20 person-years worth of free engineering help from Apple. And you people blame APPLE for this?!?
What if Microsoft came up with a new OS that looked like Linux, smelled like Linux, but yet - was totally closed and properitary. The general public would see too choices. A 'Linux' by Microsoft and a 'Linux' by some random would-be hackers. Honestly, which is a large company going to choose? And by your logic, you won't be able to sue Microsoft for anything. Despite the fact that Microsoft received tons of free software development and violated GNU public license (which i'm not sure if that'd hold up in court anyways!).
Companies NEED to stand up for their products - legally if required. In business, you can't let everyone just walk over you. Otherwise there's absolutely no incentive to innovate if anyone can copy your ideas and make money off it before you can recoup your expenditures.
Its no fun if you come home to your wife and kids and explain that you just filed for bankruptcy.
Tom
I love the name! That's funny!
But, as I understand it, the "flaming Powerbooks" never shipped. Here's an entertaining double-standard, though: Apple makes Powerbooks that can, in certain circumstances, catch fire. Everybody bashes them.
Micron recently had a similar problem with portables sold to Air Force. No one says anything. Hell, I read about it on ONE Macintosh site. Nothing in the mainstream press.
Hopefully now you understand why Mac people get so offended with the blatant double-standard in reporting.
"Dumb" and "Terminal"... sounds like two words with which I would describe the iMac...
Folks, have no fear. If Apple is going to sue each and every company that makes an all-in-one or easy-open case in shades other than beige... well, they outta be broke in no time. As for current sales, Sears has been telling it as it is, suggesting shoppers to go with Wintel rather than an iMac for the reasons of software and best bang for the buck. Best Buy pulled out, CompUSA is a joke. Oh, and don't forget that Apple's stock is taking a hit from this silly lawsuit.
Way to go, Apple. But are you now going to sue the public for "hurting you" ?
The problem with a commandline is that you have to know how to get this raw and unsanitized information. Not to mention know how to interpret it. And I have yet to see a GUI prevent a commandline interface to it. Applescript works nicely. MacPerl works nicely.
And I don't understand your comment about directories becoming folders. Its just another name that happens to be closer to a business environment - big deal.
Tom
Have you ever been to Korea? They call themselves a third world country. They are still mostly a rural agrarian economy. It isn't american chauvanism, just the basic truth.
Simplify
Flatten
System Icons need to have a consistent 2d look with at most 4 colors available to them. All of them. Not 4 for this one and three other colors for this other one. It would probably be advisable for the base color of many icon to be a tint, ie some gray added to the color. I'm not talking about grays added to suggest modeling. Go easy (-ier) on the drop shadow thing. Yeah, mac uses some drops but they aren't fighting gradients within the icon itself, dig?
It's tempting to make a showy dimensional icon with several colors. It's also self-defeating, as can be quickly seen by tossing a collection of overdone under-systematized icons on a desktop and then taking a look, otoh, at a collection designed with some intelligent restraint as a system. Look at the use of "ledger-ruled" gray text fields in the Mac finder. Look at how little space is wasted in the borders, yet the feel of precise organization is at a maximum. It's clean and uncluttered. In the similar-looking gnome/Enlightenment treatment of the gmc -the 3d marble theme, which I am using now-- ease of legibility is undercut by the awkward bright blue for directories, which jumps off the screen, and the overly worked border/button/slider areas. (borders are supposed to less interesting than what they enclose, otherwise they compete and distract.)
Design is hard, folks, don't try it at home. Flush the eyes with clean, cool tap water and seek professional help immediately.
Although my title sounds like it, I am not actually advocating cloning the exact look of the Mac gui. No doubt Steve Jobs' lawyers would have a commercial Linux distro bent over the railings in Federal court if that happened. Nor am I advocating cloning Mac conventions like the context sensitive menubar. (Which really makes sense to me only on a small screen, like 14-15")Or the workings of the Finder. I prefer the file tree in the left windowpane like KDE --and Gnome, too, except Jeezeus is it ugly!-- with the option of icons or detailed listing. Linux and other OS's that can use KDE/Gnome have Mac beat in functional fs navigation.)Or the window buttons from the Platinum gui. (Which work better in the E-Mac Enlightenment theme anyway). Applying design principles so the stuff looks as good as it works --that is what I am hoping happens for one of these projects. The look is very much part of the way something like a GUI works, and deserves as much care as the code that makes it go. Just the same way elegant, clean code is to be preferred and applauded by those (not me) with the training and experience to judge it, clean functional design is to be preferred over the clunky and toy-like. Be sure the home and business audience is ready to judge harshly on this account: these people think the GUI IS the computer! No excuse for the clunky or slow appearance of Linux desktops will appease them. (I know this because I deal with it from family members)
Now, all you zit-popping "Linux r00ls" children be sure to flame me good and hard. What did I do to alleviate this problem, Well I tried really hard to talk a friend who is good enough a designer of icons into applying for the advertized job at RedHat. Wouldn't bite.
What the hell is a "whinny boy"? Is that some sort of horse thing?
Apple spent a lot of money, I'm sure, on paying designers to come up with the iMac's look.
Apple also spent a bunch of money coming with the Macintosh interface's distinctive look & feel. Somewhere to the tune of $50,000,000.00, according to Tog.
Because the Macintosh Look & Feel is not as "real" as a box on your desk, does this entitle it to less protection?
Personally, I agree with Apple about their rights to protect the distinctiveness of their products. But Apple also needs to be able to prove that the company explicitly looked at an Apple product and said "We'll make it [look, feel, act] just like that!" Obviously, Apple blew it when they licensed the interface to Microsoft, which is why the cause should have and was thrown out of court.
A spokesman for FuturePower stated that the shape of the EPower is the only logical shape for a low-footprint personal computer. Well, then, they should be able to produce the research showing that they studied this topic and came to that conclusion. We should be able to see the prototypes that they went through with other designs. There should be tons of evidence showing the path they used to come up with the machine.
By the way, as further evidence of FuturePower's questionable behaviour, has anyone noticed the similarity in names between FuturePower's EPower and E-Machine's ETower? They're stealing the design from Apple and the name from E-Machines, a company which has been also getting lots of media play.
These guys are rip-off artists, pure and simple.
The (legal) issue is not trademark or patent infringement, its markeplace confusion.
Apple spent millions designing and promoting the iMac. The E-Power machine looks pretty clearly like an intentional imitation of the iMac. If E-Power had gone off and created a unique design for an all in one, easy to set up PC, there would have been no problem. But when they purposefully try to create confusion in the marketplace and therefore attract some of the customers that were looking for an iMac but mistook the E-Power for one, then they open themselves up for a lawsuit.
Case in point: Apple isn't suing Gateway for their all in one. They aren't suing Sony for their SlimTop (or whatever its called).
There are precedences for this kind of thing; the Coca-Cola 'slender waist' bottle has been defended from imitation.
Thank you for admitting the iMac's draw is the case itself. Now: if the clone company had also shoehorned in a way-old motherboard design loaded with Larry Lightbulb crap most people don't need, left out the floppy, cut corners on the video card, included a sad pair of 8 Ohm speakers and a keyboard and mouse straight from the Happy Victory Blossom Erectlonic Factoly, THEN you'd have a case of sincere flattery. This is more like _homage._
"Say that you designed something revolutionary, and part of it's success was the fact that it took many separate parts and combined them into one easy to use package."
The iMac wasn't the first to pack everything inot one box. Several PC manufacturers have made PCs in the monitor long before the iMac. There were even PCs about the size of a keyboard, only thicker to house drives and an ISA slot. Even the original Mac can't take the credit since many early computers came in an all-in-one package (remember the Commodore PET or the TRS-80 ?).
The only beef Apple really has is how similar it looks and unless they took a cast of the iMac and duplicated the case exactly, it is rather like Ford suing Chevy because their cars have smooth round bumpers.
This suit is a bit different. Apple's suit against MS was ridiculous, given that Windows is quite obviously a steal of X11, not Mac OS.
That Future Power couldn't design their own external shell for a PC is a bit ludicrous. Apple does spend lots of money on design and they have a right to protect that interest. After all, one of the keys to the iMac's success is its design and color scheme.
Future Power very blatantly copied them without making any real modification.
As an example, if Acer's cases were very popular and another computer manufacturer copied them exactly, Acer would most probably sue, too.
In the case of Microsoft and Apple several years ago, Apple lost not because of "look and feel issues" but because then-CEO John Sculley signed a deal with MS saying that MS was allowed to copy certain features of the Mac's GUI in exchange for something or other (I forgot the details)
Ah, yes... something or other... what might that have been? Oh yeah, I remember! Apple's ASS! (Embarrassment often causes repressed memory, so don't feel too bad.)
Loser companies often bite the hand that feed them, which is why there are so many ex-CEOs wearing name tags at Best Buy. Fortunately Apple is headed by a terrible-two-year-old billionaire dilletante at the moment, so he'll probably avoid that fate, even if what's left of his brain trust doesn't....
The first time he pulled that stunt, in the late '80s with the NeXT ("the what?"), he was tripping, yeah. This time he's RIGHT GOD DAMN IT! HE'S RIGHT AND YOU'RE WRONG! DO YOU KNOW HOW USELESS FLOPPIES ARE! YOU DUMB SON OF A BITCH!
Jobs on a bad day is more fun than pro wrestling, especially if you have a higher-pay, lower-stress job waiting in the wings.
The iMac is not that innovative. After all Apple borrowed or licensed a lot a technologies originally designed for PCs. USB, PCI bus and IDE drives found in iMacs were all created and used first in PCs. If Apple can copy the PC why not the other way? I think it's great that companies can use the technology that best suits their needs.
If memory serves me I think the first all-in-one computer was the Commodore PET. Wow, it even had an integrated tape drive. :)
And in what way does the coloring of the iMac serve a functional purpose that should be copied because it works well. The only functional purpose of the iMacs coloring is that it looks cool so people buy it. So E-Power has gone and totally copied the color scheme (oh I forgot, they are naming the colors after gemstones, rather than fruit flavors) when they could have done pretty much anything they wanted.
Except you wouldn't have the giddy thrill of voiding your warranty when you went to OC your new celeron because the Future Power doesn't come with one. Ahhh, so that's why it's only $800!!!
Nice Try
Wow. I am so clever. I will make mac users look really clever by swearing at people, and arguing about a really relevant topic like grammar. If only I had the brain power to think of an intelligent comment to make...
So that you could use your mouse with your right hand... at least I had ergonomic problems until I switched to using my left had...
future point has as much right making this computer as i do starting a watch company called ROLEK.
'nuff said.
Just compare specs and prices. Apple as always refuses to compete based upon offering its customers better bang for their buck. Remember when they killed the clone market? Jobs is no better than Gates and perhaps more whiney. Just about everything on this computer is better than the iMac counterpart the cpu speed is near double. And for 30% less!
Is apple gonna start suing all the companies that are making imac colored hubs, power strips etc next? Hell they should sue the new beatle, its egg shaped and comes in many "flavors", You know different PC vendors cases look very similar, they actually compete based upon value and performance. Why cant apple do the same?
you can still get one of those computers in amiga style cases but they're not 486's I belive they run about $600 go to http://www.cabletech.net
james
d o s d e m o n . o r g
Well, I guess it all comes down to the fact that they only thing they *have* to sell now is the way the iMac looks. Nobody buys them for technical quality, and MacOS may have been relatively easy to learn once, but that's no longer the case.
The problem there is that they are all manufactured by the same peron. They are payed to produce the van for the other company. Look at the Dodge Stealth and the Mitsubishi 3000 GT, or the Honda Passport and the Izuzu Rodeo, or ... on and on. They're not rips if they are paid to make it for the other company. A lot of car companies have investments in others. Ford has a stake in Mazda and Kia. GM has deals with toyota(they even make their cars in the same plant(see Fremont, CA). Anyways, the point is that you picked a really bad example with the auto industry.
Okay. I've heard it all now. There is no possible way anyone could confuse the iMac with a Wintel machine. Unless of course they were blind. Some specific points:
,As to Daewood's response, 'The parabollic shape is the best for a small footprint' (Paraphrased) That's true. With a CRT a parabollic shape is the most efficent shape. It will reach beyond the CRT's electron gun, which is very important. NOTE: This isn't the smallest footprint for a PC, but that's not the issue, the fact that they use a CRT instead of an LCD screen is important in this instance. But I think Gateway has the All-In-One Wintel machine covered with their Notebook-disguised-as-a-Full-Machine unit.
1st, the Daewood machine is not transparent, such as the iMacs, but translucent.
This qualifies it for the 'not the same machine' award. (This reminds me of the Intel hacking web-site, with the dropped e... Hmmm, that is diffrent enough to be outside of trademark/copyright. No possibility of a confusion there.) The truth is, when you copyright something, you don't copyright/trademark a look and feel. That is an idea, and unless Copyright law has changed, is not copyrightable. Therefore, Apple shouldn't have a legal ground to stand upon because you can not copyright/trademark anything but specifics. You only need to change one thing, say the complete internals of the machine, and that makes it legally different.
2nd
3rd, a DIFFERENT OS! Hmmm, I think that eliminates all the possibility. Unless it comes preloaded with NT. Then maybe, as NT is stable as ever compared to Win9x. I highly doubt anyone would confuse Win9x with MacOS Anything.
First of all show me some independant REAL WORLD testing that shows a mac with a 333 can beat a 450 second of all its a FACT many more servers run on the intel platform than macs, stability is not an issue when you buy decent parts for much cheaper than the simular mac ones.
Im tired from comments from Yet another Green tin Foil wearing Mac Head.
Yeah, I have to type in all my IRQ values at boot-up after I set the on-board clock, and if I mess one up, the computer explodes.
Boy, I hate Macs because even the 1999 models ship with 9" mono screens and hard-wired 1-bit video.
Yeah, yeah yeah while you are busy learning IRQs, DIPs, .BATs, .INIs the rest of us are busy changing the world.
MAC -- the only three letters you ever need to know
Let's use our imagination. Say the VW Bug was an electric car (ie no gas). It's not but lets pretend. Now say Ford came out with something that looked similar but was a gasoline car. How do you think that lawsuit would turn out?
BTW I drive a '71 VW Bug
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offi ces/pac/design/laws.html
Actually, there is pretty good legal protection for "look and feel" with respect to hardware. It's called "trade dress," and basically the rule is, if it looks similar enough to a distinctive design to potentially confuse consumers, then you're in trouble.
Apple should have no real trouble winning on these issues; even the box these things come in looks similar.
A pretty good article about Apple, Future Power, trade dress, etc. can be found here.
Anonymous cowards just don't want Rob to have their root password!
The reason Apple didnt win against the Microsoft case wasn't because of "look and feel" but a loophole in a contract wich let Microsoft off the hook.
OK Mr Computer Guru,
Why isnt WinNT 4 more stable than 3.51??
How come 98 isnt more stable than 95?
How come none of them are more stable than BSD Unix, which is older?
8.0 and above are as stable as any of the consumer Windows releases, and probably more so for most computers. I still wouldnt run them as my server, but they do just fine for home.
Apple started the Personal Computer revolution and started the GUI revolution.
Just because you dont like the iMac doesnt mean that they havent innovated consistently in their 25 plus year history.
Imagine how different things would be if Apple hadnt been around. The PC revolution probably would have started in the mid eighties and the GUI would have been added, oh, right about now. PCs wouldnt have come to the home so soon and Linus would have made his OS for mainframes and it would have just been ported like last year.
So before I get off my rocker too much, just dont forget what that nasty propietary company with the evil CEO has brought to the world in the last 25 years.
When the cost of defending those features becomes higher than the cost of losing the sale to a rip-off copy.
Cirby said:
Actually, no, they wouldn't...you see, something like a year back Mercedes bought Chrysler Corporation, of which Dodge Trucks is a division. (Yes, the official name of the company is Daimler-Chrysler now, too.)
Now, if Forddid a knockoff of it, on the other hand... :)
Weren't they the inventors of the "look and feel" lawsuit in the first place?
IIRC, I believe that's why the EMACS maintainers won't port it to Macintosh.
-Erik-
'73 Bug had fuel injection. I know; I had one; it sucked. Wish it had been a '72...
--
Yeah, and Apple was making the original Macintosh in 1984 which was an all-in-one... and the TRS-80 I have is even older...
...end of transmission...
I don't know about cerial, but the company that makes Goldfish Crackers sued (and won) to prevent another company from marketing similar goldfish shaped crackers. I think that an "O" is just too generic a shape to sue over, but a goldfish shaped cracker, or the imac case, or the distenctive shape of a coca cola bottle, or the body of a VW Beatle would be. Then again, IANAL.
"Remember, there never were pineapple-almond cookies here."
well i think that instead of trying to duplicate the imac's look, just make NEW designs...intel is supposedly doing that, and they have a few cute ones....but i personally think that the Mac ppl have a real feel for asthetics and what pleases the eye and a lot of these rip-off case makers just dont get it, making the case look not nearly as spiffy
:)
but then again i have a beige case on my peecee and i leave the side off 24/7...its about the insides anyway
"There is no spoon" - Neo, The Matrix
I suggest you look at the Chevy/GMC and Ford fullsize trunks again.
There is very little similarity in the designs. In fact the Chevy/GMC truck has changed the least in the last two revs. The overall exterior shape of the Chevy/GMC is very much like it was in the 1986 rev.
The Ford 150 truck went to a more rounded hood with a "hourglass waist" step behind the cab and no "bulbous fenders".
Actually the Ford Crewcab has always been a larger trunk than the Dodge Ram. The Ram does have a larger engine than the Ford/Chevy.
The only real rip-off in the full-size trunk industry was Ford/Dodge's copying of the Chevy/GMC "third door".
THis article has tons of images of the imac look-alike. It is obvious that they copied Apple down to the keyboard. I hope Apple wins.
p -off.shtml
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/9906/imac-ri
> there's no such thing as a fuel injected bug
:)
Yes there is. I don't know about the rest of the world, but in the U.S., from 75 to 79 the bug had fuel injection.
Unless you meant to say that it didn't work well
And I have a fuller post elsewhere about the trademark issues.
Disclaimer: I am a lawyer, but I'm probably not admitted in your jurisdiction. This is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, see a lawyer who is.
This isn't about patent, and it isn't about copyright. Forget about those, neither apply.
It's about trademark, and particularly, "trade dress," the appearance of the product.
Apple does *not* need to have filed any paperwork to have this protection, at least not in Common Law countries (generally, those that speak english and otherwise inherited the british legal system). *Use* of a trademark establishes it in the markets in which it is used. The filing of a trademark simply gives notice to areas where it is not used, and prevents anyone else from acquiring a trademark after filing.
The appearance of the iMac is distinctive. It qualifies for this protection, just as the Coca-Cola bottle (as has been noted elsewhere).
This does *not* mean that other companies cannot have translucent cases, or egg-shaped cases, etc. But if the thing looks exactly like an iMac, it's violating apple trademarks. If it vaguely resembles it so that it only reminds the viewer of an iMac, it's likely to be O.K. Somewhere in between is a cutoff point where it's too similar, and is likely to be mistaken for the other, imply a relation, or dilute the value of the trademark.
There's also a few links and comments in roger_ford 's comments, which deserves another couple of moderation kicks.
Disclaimer: I am a lawyer, but I'm probably not admitted in your jurisdiction. This is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, see a lawyer who is.
This isn't about patent, and it isn't about copyright. Forget about those, neither apply.
It's about trademark, and particularly, "trade dress," the appearance of the product.
Apple does *not* need to have filed any paperwork to have this protection, at least not in Common Law countries (generally, those that speak english and otherwise inherited the british legal system). *Use* of a trademark establishes it in the markets in which it is used. The filing of a trademark simply gives notice to areas where it is not used, and prevents anyone else from acquiring a trademark after filing.
The appearance of the iMac is distinctive. It qualifies for this protection, just as the Coca-Cola bottle (as has been noted elsewhere).
This does *not* mean that other companies cannot have translucent cases, or egg-shaped cases, etc. But if the thing looks exactly like an iMac, it's violating apple trademarks. If it vaguely resembles it so that it only reminds the viewer of an iMac, it's likely to be O.K. Somewhere in between is a cutoff point where it's too similar, and is likely to be mistaken for the other, imply a relation, or dilute the value of the trademark.
There's also a few links and comments in roger_ford 's comments, which deserves another couple of moderation kicks.
hawk, esq.
http://www.futurepowerusa.com/i mages/epower_big.jpg
Of course they shouldn't - and they don't. But that is not the point.
"Coloured case" is too generic a concept to be patented/trademarked. So is "beige box". However, you can't describe the iMac's design in such generic terms. To decribe what constitutes the iMac's design would take many pages of description or pictures (which I've heard are worth about a thousand words each). This can and should be copyrighted and protected, because it is the product of very real work and innovation.
I think that many of those who have argued that Apple should not be able to protect its design are not alive to the huge role industrial design plays in business and in our lives. Good industrial design improves our living environment, and justly brings reward to its producers.* Sloppy industrial design, like sloppy architecture, causes a blight.
I feel that many /. readers, who can appreciate the work and inspiration that goes into a work of art, an elegant block of code, or a beautiful GUI theme, don't apply the same appreciation to idustrial design. The iMac is not just another case, it is a masterpiece of industrial design - love it or hate it, it has become an instant classic. Why should cheap knock-off merchants be allowed to profit from the creativity of others?
Ryano
* Personally, I would like the designers themselves to see more of the reward than the corporation of capitalists, but I don't want to alienate too many Americans.
I need a new hub. A hub is a box of holes, so I'm not too particular about what I buy. If it's competitive in price, why not get a stylin' 80s-type translucent blue one? I'm all over it.
I think Apple can win this one. I'm pretty certain they trademarked that case design (something which is perfectly within their rights; Coca-Cola did it with the classic "Coke bottle" we all know and love). In this case, both companies have violated that trademark pretty badly; have you seen pictures of these things? Exact knock-offs, right down to the little ridges on the top of the case (no Apple logos of course). They're even offering them in the same colors, though they're naming them after gemstones instead of flavors.
I applaud Apple for this one. This isn't software, and it certainly isn't look-and-feel. It's a company trying to make money off of Apple's success with the iMac by making an inferior copy. Sorta like Windows only even more obvious.
REALLY actually, there are lawsuits like this all of the time. People like fashion designers, home furniture makers, and soft drink companies sue other all of the time for copying industrial designs.
Just remember that the only reason Apple lost the "look and feel" lawsuit against Microsoft was because Apple had previously signed a badly-written contract with MS that basically gave away the ranch. Microsoft didn't win because of "look and feel" merits- Apple lost because of Apple's crappy lawyers in the early 1980s.
You're kind of going the wrong way about this if you're comparing a single stylistic item (bulbous fenders) with a complete design (the iMac).
If Mercedes-Benz came out with an MB pickup truck that looked *exactly* like one of the big Dodge RAM pickups, with the minor exception of an MB logo on the hood, you can bet your ass that they'd get sued into the stone age over it.
Bulging fenders are a stylistic bit on a par with the round mouse on the iMac.
Note also that some of the trucks that you think are ripoffs of the Dodge are just different trucks made by Dodge.
> All companies copy each other.
> This is true for cases, hardware, etc...
Only if you buy cheap PC clones.
> This is what business is about.
False. It's only true for no-talent hacks who try to justify their low-grade thefts with "everyone else is doing it."
> Apple is dead and will stay dead because it
> never understood that.
...except that they're one of the few computer companies that's actually *gaining* in market share right now. The ones that followed your market plan are busily going down the tubes. Packard-Bell, for example. The ones that are doing well have established a market presence are are defending it as much as they can. Try starting up a computer company that ships everything in a Gateway-type "cow box" and see how well you do. Until they sue you to death.
The logo nameplate on the original Apple II and the Apple II Plus used "][" for the roman numeral II. The Apple IIe and IIc used "//" instead. The Apple III used "///" It was a logo and industrial design style decision.
I for one haven't used my floppy drive for over 6 months and I use my computer for at least 6 or more hours per day.
As far as the stability of MacOS, I will have to agree up to the last MacOS 7.x i used which was 7.6.1. When I installed MacOS 8.6 I noticed a far greater stability than both my NT machine at work and the many Windows 9x machines I have used.
Be careful not to assume things.
sum fine
yes, they did get permission.
And made considerable donations as well.
Ever see the old Lear-Siegler
ADM terminals? Both are shaped
similarly. The only difference
is the colors - and that isn't
TOO different.
The ADM's expired in the early 80s
so any "design patents" have expired.
I kinda wonder how valid either would
be.
Have you compiled your kernel today??
``This is the sort of thing 3rd world countries have been trying to do for decades - come out with a cheap knock-off of an American made product''
Last time I looked at the back of my brothers G3 Mac, I noticed it was mad in Taiwan.
And I wouldn't call Daewoo a company from a 'third world country'. They own more light and heavy indutrial concerns than many people could imagine. Bought a Japanese electrical product lately? If it wasn't made in a Daewoo sub-contract factory, then it was probably shipped in a Daewoo made cargo vessel, and inloaded at the docks by a Daewoo made crane ...
The American industrial sector is dying, and the bits that aren't are foreign owned. Look up the businesses owned by the Hanson Trust sometime - they own massive anmounts of US industrial concerns. Although they a re a strip and sell outfit, closing R'n'D and then selling the superficially successful shell of a company a year later ...
Chris Wareham
Has anyone out there read the book "More Letters From A Nut"? Supposedly it was written by Jerry Seinfeld and some cohorts under the pseudonym in the subject line of this post. Essentially the book consists of incredibly absurd letters sent to legitimate entities (corporations, pro sports teams, city governments, etc.), and the replies obtained from them. Parts of it are hilarious, and one in particular is relevant.
Ted once wrote to the Coca-Cola company that he was planning on marketing a soft drink called "Kiet Doke", the slogan for which was "it tastes nothing like Pepsi!". The original letter is a howl.
The reply from Coca-Cola was even more telling: the happy gnomes in Atlanta wanted Ted Nancy to sign a release form, providing confirmation that he would never create a soft drink called "Kiet Doke".
Yep, Coca-Cola had corporate pit bulls (oops, I mean, lawyers) ready to pounce on Mr. Nancy. They felt they had a legitimate case, if in fact Ted Nancy wasn't kidding. And they were probably right.
The Apple suit is very much like this one, except that an actual product exists (vs. just a letter from a nut).
For the record, Ted sent a letter back stating that he'd abandon the project in favor of one called "Piet Depsi" ("it tastes nothing like Coke!").
-----
".sig,
I agree with you there. I never said there was anything innovative or original about the design of the iMac. Non-beige computers aren't new, nor are all-in-one designs. But aside from the new PC clone, there aren't any computers that look like the iMac. And that's why Apple is suing Future Power... Future Power's computer looks almost *exactly* like an iMac.
:-)
What are these differences that someone has mentioned? A regular mouse? A PC Keyboard? Windows running on the machine instead of the Mac OS? I can't believe any of these "differences" will be apparent to the grandmother who walks into a computer store and buys one machine for her grandson when she meant to buy the other.
Hmmm... that may not be the best example. A computer is quite an expensive present coming from a grandparent. But you know what I mean.
Mike
I wonder where the line can be drawn when it comes to copyright infringement. I'm on Apple's side on this one... that new PC is a blatant rip-off of a currently unique product and Future Power shouldn't be allowed to sell something that's almost an exact cosmetic duplicate of the iMac.
But I probably would not feel the same way in a year or two if Apple ever decided to levy a similar lawsuit after more PC manufacturers had deviated from the standard "beige" PC cases and come out with unique designs of their own, some of which would undoubtedly incorporate a few elements of the iMac without copying the appearance verbatim.
So where do you draw the line? How long can a product be considered unique until some of the product's features become common across the industry?
Mike
Of course, JWZ doesn't seem to enjoy ANY... :-)
I'm sorry, I disagree. A command line interface (ususually) provides information in a raw and 'unsanitized' form. A GUI tends to oversimplify at times. Granted, there is a much higher learning curve on a command line interface, but in my experience, directories and files become 'folders' and 'documents' ever so much quicker when a GUI's involved.
The iMac resembles the Lear Siegler ADM3A, other
than the colors. The ADM3A was a distinctive
(pretty or horrifying, depending upon your
preference) blue shade.
When I first saw an iMac billboard, I assumed it
was some sort of "retro-computing" marketing
campaign, a return to the computing of the 1970's.
Craig Milo Rogers
Actually, Apple was one of the first companies to ship mainstream all in the one computers, aimed at reguluar people (Think about the Lisa, Mac Plus series, etc).
My Mac Plus is a great compact computer, it is still sticking away.
At anyrate, if you have seen the iMac clone PC, it is obviously not a clone. It is a hell of alot more harder to set up for one, it doesn't have a PowerPC processor, and almost all the rest of the hardware is different. You don't just spend five seconds setting up a ePower iMac Clone, you have to have to at least look once or twice at ports.
Different shell, different componets, etc.
Maybe it's just that I am becoming a dumb PC bigiot as I get old (although I still love my Macintosh), but I think Apple needs good hard competition.
Just remember, we might not be using CD-ROMs, USB or RAM SIMMs, had Apple tried to sue off all clones. Personally, I think this is a case of invation veruses monopolian.....
Yes, E_Power Machine is very much different in specs, and how it works. Heck, Proccessor designs are totally different, as is the motherboards.
Internally, a E_Power Machine is *NOTHING* like a iMac, only similaries inside that I can see is they both use ATAPI CD-ROMS and Hard Drives.
(heh... Didn't Apple bring ATAPI to the Mac). ATAPI sucks compared to SCSI, but it is cheap and works okay.
I think the main reason for the suit is over the quick look at the external appearence, it might confuse customers. That could be a bases of a *weak* lawsuit, but it would die quickly. But in general, it's a totally different machine.
I asked you this about the iMac clone:
1) Where the fsck is the PowerPC G3 Processor?
2) How come the iMac clone plastics look different?
3) Why is the shape rounder then the iMac?
4) Where is the AWACS sound controller?
5) Can it natively run my favorite Mac Programs or my favorite LinuxPPC programs?
6) I don't see any illegally ripped off Apple ROM?
7) Ehh... How come command-option-o-f doesn't drop me into OpenFirmware when I turn on the E-Power iMac clone.
The fact is it is not a clone. Maybe it's case looks somewhat similar to iMac cases, but it certainly not exact.
I was thinking about that also...
Those iMac clones would make nice Linux consumer / low end boxes. They are cheap and look nice on the shelf.
With the iMac being so broken in certain areas (such as OpenFirmware), the iMac clone would make installing Linux a bit easier, because you wouldn't have to mess with having to OS's just to use Linux.
But then again, I would miss having PowerPC hardware to play with, but I think I might be able to get over it for a machine, that is mainly one for the shelf.
Just look at the cars. They all look the same. (in the same category). From the side most people could not figure out exacly what car they are looking at.
That's funny. I seem to recall that the IIe was written "][e", but the IIc was written "//c". I think the earlier ones (plain II and II+) were actually written with I's, but I can't be sure.
Actually I think VW might themselves be vulnerable to a look-and-feel lawsuit from toaster manufacturers over the design of the new bug.
JK. Actually, I think the new bug looks pretty hot... I always stare when I pass one on the freeway.
Define "deviating from the standard beige case". IBM made some remarkably stylish solid black computers a year or two back. I still have the keyboard from one somewhere. Okay it wasn't bright green with a translucent case, but it certainly looked unique, and it was pre-imac. The original model T was produced in "any color the customer wants, so long as it's black". Later, they diversified into bright red sports cars and psychadelic VW bugs (or the new "Volkswagen Feature"; there's no such thing as a fuel injected bug). Look-and-feel differentiation is normal for an industry. It didn't occur to most of US for the first decade or two because we're not exactly normal, are we? Rob
Logically, it must be a feature. :P
Rob
Egads, that thing is hideous. Looks like it should be sold out of the back of an unmarked white van.
Part of design is color, in this particular case it's also translucent color and not solid. That's one of the earmarks of iMac design. Also it's clear that it's a total ripoff, from the keyboard to the all-in-one case design
Bullshit. If they didn't copy the case by molding theirs from a disassembled IMac, then I say screw
Apple.
Apple's just trying to Microsoft their way around the hardware industry by filing frivolous lawsuits that have no merit, in order to bankrupt a fledgling startup that has the potential to compete against them.
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
When I installed MacOS 8.6 I noticed a far greater stability than both my NT machine at work and the many Windows 9x machines I have used.
You should expect that 3-4 years of design between Win95 and MacOS8.6 would turn out a more stable product...
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
From a distance, they're very difficult to tell apart.
This, I believe, is the key. How many people buy computers from a distance? If it's obvious when you get close or use the machine, I don't believe Apple has a case. And it will be because the OS is Windows. And there's a floppy drive.
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
Um...
You *can* win on a look-and-feel basis, if you're talking about the look-and-feel of something material, and you've got a design patent for it. That's sorta what design patents are *for*.
Does Apple have a design patent on the iMac?
Its no longer possible to sell any hardware based on 'what it can do' alone. You've probably seen those Intel-based PC commercial that shows full-motion, high res video from some non-existant game or an imaginary Internet. It isn't about what computers can do, its about what you can convince people they can do. If this ePower machine gets to market, the company will likely try to market it as 'just as good as the iMac' when its just not true. Apple doesn't just make pretty enclosures. Their machines have high quality parts throughout: I guarantee that the speakers and monitor on this ePower won't be half as good as the iMacs. Apple is doing anything essentially different from other PC companies in advertising, they're just changing the way its done (again :). The design of the iMac isn't justu about esthetics, it is a complete industrial design. Those ridges on the top help with heat dissipation, and the handle on the back (not included on the ePower) becomes pretty useful at times. Unfortunately for Apple, the ignorant masses usually just don't realize the differences. They want to buy their computer based on how they buy a living room recliner: "Hey, these both look fine on the outside, but this one's $300 cheaper!"
I prayed about it, and God said, "Don't do it!" But I thought, "I know better."
If I were a computer manufacturer, I'd try and sell my systems for what they could do, not what they looked like; the aesthetics would be just a side note. Now, Apple is suing this company based on their PC case. It almost sounds as if Apple has succumbed to this, selling boxen merely from an aesthetic perspective.
I mean, sure, if I could afford one, I'd have an iMac, but not particularly for the case, as much as the platform that would allow me to install PPC.
If Apple has directed their marketing towards selling computers based on appearance (let's hope not), they've got more problems to worry about than cheap lookalikes.
So where are my networked graphics? :-)
If memory serves, Microsoft were members of the Open Software Foundation, and contributed to Motif's design - that's why they are so alike. But whether the Windows 3.0 look came before Motif 1.0, I cannot remember.
The first comment I agree with!!
This is a gross violation of Apple's IP. Apple HAS to sue or their shareholders (me included) would go insane...
If you can look at the E_Power and really say that there is no iMac rip-off in there, you are smoking some seriously strong crack.
Apple spent millions of dollars developing this idea and now this knock off company re-wraps it? Totally unacceptable.
RateVegas.com - Vegas Reviews
There is much more to the iMac than an all-in-one case design.
Everyone seems to be missing this point... It's not like Apple was the first one to do an all-in-one (or like the iMac was their first AIO, look at all the classic Macs and the G3 AIO)!
The iMac represented a computer that was designed from the start to be easy to use for anyone. Literally anyone could setup an iMac in about 5 minutes flat.
It also represented an attempt to make the computer a more fashionable accesory in the home, not just a beige box with wires everywhere...
RateVegas.com - Vegas Reviews
Parts of the production process of the iMac ARE patented, including the way the plastics are colored.
RateVegas.com - Vegas Reviews
They're called "shareholders" and they scream for blood when you don't sue if this sort of thing happens...
Hmmmm... Red Hat will soon have shareholders. Wonder what they will make Bob Young do...
RateVegas.com - Vegas Reviews
Something like 30% of iMacs sold are to new computer users.
15-20% are to Wintel converts.
I'd say half of their sales means competition.
RateVegas.com - Vegas Reviews
They did get everyone's permission.
RateVegas.com - Vegas Reviews
For me there is a difference between designing another computer with the same goal and ripping off someone else's idea down to the plastic color.
I don't see why consumers would see this in a bad light. I resent it when others in my office rip off my work and put their name on it...
RateVegas.com - Vegas Reviews
If this flies I am going out and start my own web site, and call it Slashdit, complete with exact copies of the page layout, news stories and everything.
And there would be nothing wrong with that. If you read the fine print, Rob's open sourced ('scusí if I got the wrong term in here, been a while since I read the fine print) this site and you are free to do that. Go to old articles and search for Fishdot. That's right Fishdot!
I forget the exact address, so I'm not linking there. But the point is, I can modify two lines of code for the GIMP and release it cause the license says so.
Coca-Cola would have a lawsuit, because they own the trademark to the curvy bottle and the red button with the curvy bottle on it. Apple might or might not have trademarked the look of iMac, but more than likely if the paper is in the system, then they've got this one in the bag.
Now, back to Slashdit... If you do make it, at least have the decency to host it on a server that can handle the traffic, because I have a feeling that Slashdot can always handle another mirror. And it would be a damn shame if Slashdit was always down because it couldn't handle the load.
ALL HAIL BRAK!!!
"As for the "windows enthusiast", I didn't know such a beast existed. Can anyone confim or deny this for me?"
/.'ers throw my way), my opinion is that the only "windows enthusiasts' out there are people who've never used _anything_ else and people who only do gaming.
As someone who actually makes a living as an NT administrator (and yes, I can use all the sympathy you kind
In any case, I think Apple will easily win the suit; the EPower box is so similar as to be easily mistaken for an iMac from any distance, and Apple does have a patent on the case design.
--I love Micro$oft's OSes; they're so badly broken that I'll never want for work...--
Actually, old IBM Selectric typewriters came in a wide variety of interesting colors like dark blue, dark red, and dark black. (None of these fruity iMac colors!). These sold pretty well, so perhaps there's a pent up demand for non-beige.
On the other hand, I got a free IBM monitor and keyboard because they were black and someone thought they clashed.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
why dont anyone make clear cases for laptops? or laptops that look fly instead of the grey or black un-imaginative crap that we are stuck with??
how about a clear or purple replacement case for my Toshiba 430CDT (OMG!! you're using a pre MMX pentium??? you must SUCK!) it runs Linux perfectly, NT, NTserver (I know I desecrated it with that install) and looks crappy because of the ugly grey... not only CEO's own laptops... some of us coders and hackers use only laptops! when you dash away from the phone booth fleeing you need to look hip! (translucent green... oooooohhh yeah!)
anyone know of any replacement laptop case companies?
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
"... use 'chicklet' keys (remember the Atari 400)..."
Remember the PCjr? Remember that keyboard?
My first computer, an Atari 400. My second computer, a PCjr.
It made me long for the plush ergonomy of the Atari 400.
I won't pretend to have compared specs between the machines, but the newest iMacs cost ~$1200, but the rev. B 233 mHz iMacs are selling at or below $900. My guess is that the cheaper iMac is a lot closer to this "knock-off" which sells for around $800 (IIRC).
I also don't remember Commodore suing the company that made a 486 PC in an Amiga 1200-style case. Now that's a machine I would like very much to own.
"I want to use software that doesn't suck." - ESR
"All software that isn't free sucks." - RMS
Here's an idea: instead of relying on shiny plastic to sell your product, what about perhaps including cool technology that copycats CAN'T beat?
They do this. How do you think they sell computers to people like me, who care more about what's in the computer than what it looks like?
The point is, the people who are most likely to be buying an iMac care more about the colorful plastic than any technology it contains that may be considered "cool." Ever start talking to a non-techie about the virtues of Linux and have their eyes glaze over? If not, try it sometime, it's kinda neat.
Apple does innovate technology, and in a big way, but most people don't care. For those of us who do, Microsoft will probably steal it anyway, but they never quite seem to get it right.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
When you say "iMac clones," do you mean computers in colorful translucent plastic? If so, that's ok, nothing illegal there. What Apple's mad about is that the computer mentioned in this article looks almost exactly like the iMac. From a distance, they're very difficult to tell apart.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
Everyone is so emotional because the kid next door got a new bike a few weeks after you got yours. I hope Apple fails.
:)
Why?
1. The colors (copying the multicolor options)
Colors are not subject to patent. So some people are unhappy with their lack of originality. Fine -hold a grudge.
2. The case (is this a pun?
I have seen IBM PCs that were consisting of the same visual composure, the only difference being the square case hidden away by a long cable. The FUNCTION is remarkably similar, everything you need being right in front of you as part of the monitor. I have a slimtop PC that has a monitor on it. Looks similar to an iMac from far away, except for the colors (and when you get close you see the monitor is square and couldn't be an iMac). If you break it into a function of it's usability I can also think of one or two computers (non-apple) that are one piece, no additional parts, integrated monitor systems. Think of the integrated Intel and Sony systems that are also changing from prototypes to reality.
Point being that the ornamentation of an integrated computer is NOT something that should be covered by the iMac patent. The FUNCTION of the system is not unique.
So you go basically to a question of style in function. Looks. Exact look and feel. Ignore the colors. Think black and white if you like.
The EPower does look similar but is NOT an exact copy. I actually like the EPower look better than the iMac. It has it's own base/stand. It has a floppy. The external parts are not interchangeable with an iMac.
If someone were coping watches from a famous manufacturer for the explicit purpose of pretending to be that brand and sell based on the brands quality name it would be deliberate deceit and should quite rightly be illegal. If they made their own similar watch, with their own name, and did not copy the PATENTED FUNCTIONALITY of their competitors watch (like a barometer in the watch perhaps?) then they are simply selling to the same market. If they used the same watch face fonts and colors one could argue they were trying to confuse the customers. As long as they don't pretend to be the opposing brand, they just lack originality.
One of the reasons the iMac was able to exist is that Apple could create the system and be assured of its perception as a functional choice. The MacOS users don't expect more. Who else besides Apple makes MacOS compatibles?
The PC industry has been avoiding cut down systems. It is (was?) untested to provide an X86 system that has little to no compatibility for expansion or used a new motherboard design with one slot. That is exactly what the EPower is - one step past a NLX motherboard. Sony started this idea and Daewoo is just trying to ride the wave.
And here is the best reason I can think of for wanting Apple to fail: I want one of these systems. I can't and wouldn't want to get it from Apple. I have money waiting to be spent on one of these systems when they hit the market and do not care how many people complain about its lack of originality. Daewoo is dead on with this one. I hope they have much success and spawn copycat system, which will then begin to innovate and differentiate themselves outside of the old system computability rules.
#define SARCASM TRUE
Computer Companies can't inovate because the government doesn't let them. Every time a company inovates, be it integrating a web browser directly into the operating system, inventing the WIMP interface, the mouse, the internet, and multimedia, or creating valuable new productivity and educational paradigms, the government swoops in and calls it 'anti-trust' or 'a monopoly'.
HOGWASH! If you want better inovation - write the government and tell them to stop persecuting inovators like Bill Gates and Microsoft - the leading inovators of some of the most poserful computer systems around (see the recent benchmarks). After all, the free market system, the greatest economic system ever, has valued Bill at more money than all of the people who came before him. Who are you to compain?
And the robot says: "In the begining was man. Man created all things. Man, with his infinite skill, created machines
Good question. Here's my ideas on how to make a computer that is cheaper looking than an iMac (making a computer feel cheaper than an iMac is easy -- just get a 'doze box)
- Replace the Fisher-Price plastic with cardboard. (But make the cardboard white and include some crayons with it, so that users can choose whatever color they want.)
- Sell it using a late-night infomercial
- Have the keyboard be built into the main unit, not detachable
- Have the keyboard use "chicklet" keys (remember the Atari 400?) instead of moving keys
- Put a hand-crank on the side, and eliminate the AC power cord
- Lower the size of the monitor to about 9" diagonal, and make it monochrome
- Put a "Designed For Windows 98" sticker on it
Any other ideas on how to make the worst-looking computer?As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Yes and no. It's a good thing for computers to have some kind of removable read/write storage, but floppies are obsolete. If the iMac included a floppy drive, no one would use it anyway. Something bigger and faster, though, like a Zip/Jaz/Syquest/etc would be good though, if you're moving files around using sneakernet.
What they really ought to do is replace the CD-ROM drive with CDRW, so they can keep the same form-factor. That would be pretty cool.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Beware: according to the ad, it comes with Windoze 98. Even if you wipe it, you'll still be paying for it and go into the sales statistics as Yet Another satisfied Microsoft customer.
I'm sure there will be plenty of x86 iMac-lookalikes. Why not buy one from a company that cares about its customers (lets you choose whether or not to buy a Windoze license) instead?
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
In the case of Microsoft and Apple several years ago, Apple lost not because of "look and feel issues" but because then-CEO John Sculley signed a deal with MS saying that MS was allowed to copy certain features of the Mac's GUI in exchange for something or other (I forgot the details). The Apple legal team was unaware of this document and went ahead with the lawsuit against MS. It was because of this document that they lost, and not because of "look and feel" issues.
According to law, a company can sue if the look of the original "communicates an idea" and if the defendant's product attempts to confuse the brand identity of this "idea." In other words, having an egg-shaped case with a white front, translucent colored back and white bottom half makes you think "It's an iMac." If the E-Power's plastics cause brand confusion, then Apple might have a case. Gucci won a similar lawsuit against a company that was putting a big golden "G" on the faces of its watches (which I'm assuming only Gucci did). Their argument was that the imitators were causing brand confusion by imitating the Gucci "G," which had become a brand identifier. Apple might have a case itself this time.
What I'm wondering about is the translucent blue 4-port hub (not making this up). Who is this supposed to appeal to? The average consumer doesn't know what a hub is. Most people who do aren't going to be impressed by the translucent nature.
I used to be one too...
I'm not any more, and I'd delete windows if there were more Linux games! (probably getting Civ:CTP, definitely RRT2 - thanks Loki!)
All companies copy each other. This is true for cases, hardware, etc...
All cars look the same now.
This is what business is about. Apple is dead and will stay dead because it never understood that.
The basic principle is be the best value/preformance/price.
All they ever did was : we do everything from floppy to cables to software to hardware.
Well let them keep their piece of crap.
I'd never buy an IMac. It's like I bought one of the first Korean cars or appliances (NOW Korea does a lot of nifty things). It looks good and has a lot of gadgets but is filled with CRAP!
The kernel needs a Gtk/Gnome-based post-install device configuration tools "a la" make xconfig. (Better sig coming soon
At least by example. Consider breakfast cereal-- just this morning I had some Toasy-O's in a big yellow rip-off cheerios box. I have a box of Corn Bursts (corn pops anybody?) that's getting a little stale, too. Same product. Nearly the same package. Fifty different companies, and nobody's getting sued. I think that a look-and-feel lawsuit, however justified, is on shaky ground with our legal system.
I have to concede this one to you, Mr. Coward! I hadn't thought that all the way through. Suppose either nobody's tried to sue because it's not cost-effective-- that doesn't make it legal. Also, I could be eating cereal from the same company in a different box. They could be counting on 'perceived quality' to drive the branded type, or just putting all the crappy o's in the generic box.
MMmmmmmMmmm.... cereal!
I'm guessing you've never actually _created_ anything, have you?
If you want a /. metaphor, imagine someone taking slashdot.com or slashdot.net (or whatever TLD) and then doing a near-exact copy of slashdot.org. Sure, people who know better will go to slashdot.org, but a lot of people won't. What happens to the ad rates for /. when people start going to slashdot.com? I'll give you a hint: they ain't going up.
The VALUE of the name "SlashDot" came from all of the hard work put in on this site. If someone else appropriates that name for a knock-off, it should be (and is) illegal.
Now, considering how much money and effort Apple has put into the iMac brand (which includes its distinctive look), anyone who tries to ride off of it is breaking the law. It's that simple.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
Sigh. Here we go again...
I used to keep the FAQ on Apple PowerBooks, and what happened with the PowerBook 5300 has been distorted beyond belief. Here are the FACTS:
1. Apple was going to ship the 5300 with a LiIon battery (this was in 1995, much earlier than most PC companies shipped with a LiIon).
2. Two 5300s _at Apple_ caught on fire, due to problems with the LiIon battery. No consumer ever got a "flaming PowerBook."
3. Rather than wait for a long time to figure out what went wrong, Apple released the 5300's with the NiMH battery for the PowerBook 190 (which used the same form factor). Apple also knocked $100 off the price of the 5300s.
4. Eventually, Apple figured out that it was the SONY battery which had a problem, not the Apple PowerBook. This problem was fixed for the PowerBook 3400 (which used a very similar form factor to the 5300s) and later PowerBooks.
It was the quality of the Japanese-made battery which made the PowerBook catch fire. Before you start nationalistic rantings, at least get your facts straight.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
It seems that everyone likes to compare these computers to cars. This case bares a striking resemblance to the one in the 70s when a whole lot of Asian manufacturers flat out copied the Fender Statocaster guitar design. Some even labled them as Fenders. Of course Fender American tried to stop them. They were mostly _really_ cheap knockoffs, but some were actually quite good. Today you can go into a music shop and not tell the manufacturer of a specific guitar without reading the labels very closely. I think that this was actually beneficial because it made Fender really focus on quality, maybe Apple should do the same.
Everyone copies ideas, it's the execution that's important. If noone where allowed to copy ideas, we wouldn't have "a better Minix than Minix" today. I think if Daewoo wants to make a computer similar to the iMac, they should be allowed. If Apple wants to retain their leadership in this market segment, they are going to have to work for it. If they want to be high-end, they shouldn't make the iMacs feels so cheap; MacOS could also stand some work also. If they want to be low end, they should probably shoot for selling them at around $500.
Screw the companies, make 'em sweat. Competition is good for the consumers.
... and get away with it? Ford is going to sue me and they have every right to. This way beyond having a similar interface. The FuturePower casing looks like a blatant iMac rip-off. I hope Apple wins. The GUI is still debatable.
Hasdi
If the "innovation" in the original was meant to refer to a verb (the act of making an imac/imac-look-a-like), then the grammar was better.
Oh, come on! Comparing a Viper to an Avalon!
They aren't in the same class: Avalons are luxury sedans; Vipers are racing coupes. If you want to compare a Viper to an import, compare it to the Nissan Z or Skyline, and keep in mind that the Viper is about $70,000 (about 2x as much as a Z).
And remember that the "innovative" Dodge Stealth is made by Mitsubishi, as were the K cars, the Eagles, and the Laser/Daytona.
Actually, a number of "American" cars are made by Japanese companies, including all of the formerly Geos-now-Chevys (Toyota and Suzuki), the Ford/Mazda pickups, the GMC/Chevy/Isuzu compact pickups, etc.
Mike
--
Mike
--
"Wi nøt trei a høliday in Sweden this yër?"
Anyone who's seen cars for most of his life will be able to pick a Beetle out of a lineup of cars. Who would be so dumb as to make a "clone" of the beetle and actually think VW would stand by and let that happen?
Such is the case (no pun intended) with iMac. The computer looks so much different from anything before it that it sticks in people's minds. That somebody would try and make a computer that's a blatant ripoff of the design simply boggles my mind. How stupid can they be? Did they really think Apple would sit by and let them do this?
One of the things I see that disturbs me the most is the people who have such pent-up hatred for Mac that they think any position Apple takes is wrong. This is much like the rabid Linux users who think anything Bill Gates does must be evil because they just don't like Windows. I mean, somebody commented that Rob was becoming like Bill Gates because they both decided to donate money to charity, and that shows some kind of "disturbing parallel" or some other BS.
I wish people would lose the mindset that "since company X makes products Y and Z, which we hate, we must now hate every decision made by company X, and adopt the opposite position in every matter."
On another note, it is truly sad that the company could not come up with a case design of its own. To claim that the similarities are just coincidental suggests such unbelievable stupidity on Daewoo's part that one wonders if the company has even a single brain among its entire workforce.
Why could they not have simply done the same research Apple had and come up with a machine that filled the same niche but was not such an obvious ripoff? I mean, if they had done a square box case, without the exact same five colors, it would be functionally identical, would appeal to the same market, and would not be a ripoff.
I think Daewoo ought to get some serious punitive damages in this case for being so stupid.
rooooar
....look kinda like the old BeBox!)
Everyone says that about colored cases these days. The simple fact is, I have yet to see any case that looks as cool as the BeBoxen did. Besides, the BeBox wasn't just about the look of the case... It was about what was in it. Check out the specs on those beasties sometime... www.be.com
If you have a pic, post a link. Otherwise, I'll believe it when I see it. And if you meant the Mac cases, you should be beaten mercilessly.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I run BeOS. The rules don't apply.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I run BeOS. The rules don't apply.
HAHAHAHAHA! You really expect me to believe that only SERVERS need protected memory, true multitasking, SMP support, etc.? Obviously you've never edited video on a Mac in Media 100, done any audio production work in Pro-Tools, any 3D in Infini-D, or any 2D animation in After Effects, or been pissed when another app takes down your system while you're working on a huge file in Photoshop, and you forgot to save your work before you jumped over to the other app...
I have done all of the above and suffered greatly when MacOS went down. When you have to redo 20 minutes to an hour of work, that's 20 minutes to an hour that you CAN'T charge to a client. It's especially embarrasing when the client is in the room with you...
At least with BeOS, WinNT, or Linux (which I wouldn't use as a workstation, but anyway) I don't have to worry about one app crashing the entire system. Especially with BeOS.
I also don't see why you wouldn't want to be able to do more than one thing at a time. I'm constantly checking e-mail while I'm surfing while I'm listening to MP3s while I'm working on graphics while I'm... well, you get the picture. Sure, grandma (read users that the iMac is targeted to) may not NEED multitasking, protected memory, etc., but grandma isn't the only one using MacOS. There are serious designers using it, and they have to deal with these problems on a daily basis.
And I can find my way around on just about ANY computer. They all have a consistency of design if you are using a GUI. They all use the same concepts throughout the navigation of the filesystem. (files, folders, menus, etc.) The window dressing doesn't matter.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I run BeOS. The rules don't apply.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I run BeOS. The rules don't apply.
Finially, an Intel clone of the iMac! My dreams of a "portable" Linux box are about to come true! I can't WAIT! :)
Don't know if you care or not.. but the Epower has no handle like the iMac. One of their design changes.
Incidentally, if you REALLY want one of these lame knockoffs, then you'd better get one before the injunction hits. Of course, they're not even shipping yet...
\//
Finially, an Intel clone of the iMac! My dreams of a "portable" Linux box are about to come true! I can't WAIT! :)
"Klaatu, verada, necktie!" -Ash
Why is it that all PC companies can do is copy Apple? Why can't they come out with their own innovative designs and add something to the progress of the industry? This sort of blatant rip off is absurd. They can't even come up with their own color for crissakes.
Seriously, this is a slam dunk for Apple. You cannot just go around copying designs for consumer products like this - they are protected by both patent and trademark laws out the wazzoo. What these guys are doing is equivalent to releasing a cola drink in a coke bottle shaped clone and calling it Cokee-Coola. Can you imagine how quickly Coca-Cola Inc. would be on their case?
If this flies I am going out and start my own web site, and call it Slashdit, complete with exact copies of the page layout, news stories and everything.
Maybe those claiming the APSL thing is a sign of how open and progressive Apple are should rethink? They sure don't seem to have changed their ways.
They've always over-used their lawyers in protecting their IP, rather than cementing it in continued innovation.
__// `Thinking is an exercise to which all too few brains
_
\\/ are accustomed' - First Lensman
Having spent that money, you think Apple wants to sit back and let other companies make a quick buck of of Apple's work and the public awareness of their product's look? No way. Like any company that wants to stay in business, Apple is protecting something they came up with. This rip-off is just trying to profit off of Apple's work. If the iMac had been a flop, do you think they would style theirs this way?
And your obvious disgust of Apple products and their strategy, which you feel is dumbing down computers, has nothing to do with whether they should protect their designs.
well.....take a look at "He's so Fine" and George Harrison's "My Sweet Lord." Harrison lost the case and paid big time, even though his defense was that the two songs were different (in lyrics at least) and he had written his song without any influence from "He's so Fine." True, it wasn't just a matter of chord progression, it was also the melody line and the chorus. But that's built on chords.
I still want my computer in an aquarium... Why just a have a fish on your screen when you can have them all around. Or even a case that is really shaped as a penguin.
I ate my tag line.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
Take a close look at the new pc. There are alot of diffrences in the unit. If someone where to sue it should be the company that made the all in one pc. Think about that. Compaq and IBM had PCs with a monitor built in. It's all about look and feel. If you could really get away with this, everyone would be sueing each other in the automotive section of the world.
I ate my tag line.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
Computer were beige before the Apple II.
I read an article last year about why
computers are beige and it all took place
before apple came along. I wish I could
remember where I read it.
"The last thing I want to do is deal with a bunch of people who want something."
Major Major
When J. Random Consumer goes into Best Buy and remembered hearing something about the iMac, and sees the iMac next to a fake one there for less, he'll think of it as a cheaper version of the iMac, and buy it. Consumers know (and probably don't care to know) little about what the differences are between computers. They are very intimidated by all the choices, the terminology, etc.
Companies must defend their copyrights and patents, or else they can't defend them later on.
The protection afforded by design patents doesn't, however, last as long as for product or process patents. I think it's 7 years as opposed to 17.
Do you think Mercedes-Benz would sue Ford if they developed a sports car that looked exactly like the Mercedes-Benz SLK? Of course they would.
If you read the article, Future Powers claims the egg design has "the most natural design to ensure the smallest footprint." This is not true at all. Gateway's Profile XL is flat-panel system that has a smaller footprint than the iMac and I am sure that other OEM have similiar flat-panel system as well.
Not only will Future Powers machine have the iMac design, it will be sold in FIVE different colors, exactly the same FIVE colors as the iMac.
I wonder if Future Powers machine has a round mouse too?
Here's an article with a side-by-side photograph of the machines.
#####
-- ladies and gentlemen we are floating in space!
Just out of interest: I often see "Apple II" written "Apple ][" or (less frequently) "Apple //". "Apple ][" seems to be much more common than "Apple II". Why is this? Who started it?
The problem is that Apple sued over the look and feel of Windows 1.0. If Microsoft had come out with something like Win95 at the time Apple sued then Apple would certainly have won. The Win9x interface is a bad rip-off of MacOS (although much more stable).
Skippy
"False modesty is the refuge of the incompetent." - The Stainless Steel Rat
Give Apple a break, eh? This sort of lawsuit is fairly common, more than likely the angle they'll take invovles trademark dilution. Like if Pepsi decided to give their bottle curves just like Coke's.
The fact is, Apple has [again] made a name for themselves; for many people, solely based on the iMac. It's unfair (and probably illegal) for someone else to make some $ off Apple's hard work, marketing, and perseverence.
There are probably an infinite number of possible case designs, and thus an infinite number cooler and better than the iMac -- I guess it's just easier to copy Apple's and wait until their next case to make a new 'breakthrough'.
shouldn't the ADM people be
upset? or are they out of
business
looks like an old dumb terminal to me
The aptest (sorry) comparison I can think of is the lowly toaster. Manufacture a toaster with the standard rectangular form factor of your everyday Proctor Silex/Sunbeam/Black & Decker toaster and you've got no problem. But make a knockoff of the cutesy Michael Graves-designed Target toasters, and you'll be the target of a nasty lawsuit.
--
--
Think Green... Burn only 100% recycled dinosaurs in you car.
It's not just the color of the case that Apple is suing over. It's the design of the keyboard and other things.
As for the floppy drive, when Future Power showed this thing off at the New York PC show last week they stated their design was different enough from Apple's because it included a floppy drive.
Apple is not suing just because Future Power is coming out with colored computers. It's more than that.
it has a floppy drive.
Jobs must'a been tripping when he nixed that one.
+&x
GO Subject
+&x
As for the "windows enthusiast", I didn't know such a beast existed. Can anyone confim or
deny this for me?
it's true. I *bows head in shame* used to be on. They are disappearing from the wild however. The only time the crowd I saw Southpark with clapped, was when Bill Gates gets killed.
+&x
Look at it! Why would anyone put the numeric keypad on the LEFT side of the keyboard?!
/* Yes, I know it's a reversed photo. I'm just being silly. */
Save the whales. Feed the hungry. Free the mallocs.
I noticed that you mention using ProTools on MacOS, but that you use BeOS. Is there something that compares to ProTools available for BeOS?
:)
I'm not really interested in the usual "make your home computer an entertainment center" software. I need something that does real multitrack recording/mixing/editing. Think ProTools, Sound Forge, or Emagic Logic -- stuff you would find in a studio.
Ideally, it would also work with a digital-only soundcard. Soundblasters just don't cut it.
This is not any sort of troll. I would get REAL interested in BeOS if something like that was available. Thanks.
Save the whales. Feed the hungry. Free the mallocs.
You beat me to it.. Those were pretty cool terminals in 1978. Beat the heck out of VT50s.
Even if they're not copying each other (and of course they are) they're after the same set of goals:
- lower wind resistance
- improved crashworthiness
- better visibility
So they converge on a similar design. Is it not possible that people are copying the iMAC design because it works well ?btw, I drive a VW.
That was my first response on seeing the posting as well.
On the other hand, I think they did go a little to far with the selection of five colors, and the color matching so well. But then again, as another person pointed out, what about all the beige boxes.
I think Apple is off their rocker on this one.
into thinking they're getting one thing when they're being sold another. the iMac has become an industry and pop culture icon, a watershed in personal computing design. Apple has a case and they have the resources to back it up.
Committee for Symmetric Distribution of the Future
... just asking.
The iMac is an excercise in industrial design, mating new materials in creative new ways benefiting an expanding consumer market. It has in less than 12 months become a pop culture icon and a watershed in the personal computing industry. These are concepts that loom small in the minds of many but are nevertheless important and legally protected.
Committee for Symmetric Distribution of the Future
For me, the issue is not strictly one of crash rates, but also of the likely consequences of a given crash. Even if early versions of the MacOS did crash more often than Win9x (and I'm far from certain of that), the worst consequence of a Mac crash was generally a quick reboot. Win9x has a pretty good chance of devouring itself in the course of crashing, or of recovering from a crash.
MacOS seems to be stable enough to use as a web server (as witness this site), but even if it isn't, at least it's not a self-eating OS.
--
Some keywords for the NSA in the Lord of the Rings universe: One Ring bind find Sauron quest Nazgul freedom
If the imac was my design and I saw this, but it has a floppy drive so that makes everything ok! :)
Well this company is just cheap and unoriginal anyway. I think that if they want to copy Apple this closely it should be their right, and I think it will be. (Look for Wheaties look alikes at the grocery store.) But it comes down to the fact that Apple was the one that actually did take their own advice and did "think different."
Their efforts to make a computer that both attractive and useful are great. I wish other computer manufacturers would work so hard.
Brennan Stehling - www.offwhite.net
Give me a break - Apple IS the innovator here with a nice new case design. Apple has always been a strong innovator in the personal computer industry, and much of what we use today is derived from other companies trying to keep pace with Apple's innovations.
:)
The Daewoo machine is a cheap ripoff. Unless they took something mechanically specific and non-obvious like the snap-on-color-shell-replacement stuff that Apple designed, I don't think they did anything illegal. Tacky and Me-Too Yes. Illegal No.
As to the innovativeness of the iMac. Give me a break - it's no more innovative than any other smart terminal going back 20 years. Apple did the computer equivalent of putting the VCR inside the TV.
Besides - It has no expansion slots and therefore is Evil.
http://www.bullnet.com
I don't see HOW Apple can win, and they must have the worst lawyers to allow this to occur.
To pull out another analogy, this would be like Ford suing Chevy because "their cars also come in many colors and are also easy to drive."
This suit will be over fast.
It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off
1968 Dodge Charger in cherry red. 1932 LaSalle, in black, of course. 1999 Dodge Viper GTS, blue with the twin white stripes. Chrysler 300, any year, and color, any model. Then go look at a boring old Camry, Avalon, or one of those. That's all there is to it....
itachi
IANAL, but....s html --- also --- http://slashdot.org/articles/99/04/28/1817216.shtm l --- also --- http://slashdot.org/articles/99/03/16/106241.shtml ). This is something that happens all the time, this is not Apple being lunatics or monopolists. It would be really nice if it didn't happen, but it's one of those quirks of US law and corporate america. It'd also be nice if people tried using an OS or a hardware setup before either raving about how great/terrible it is. I work with Macs, PC (NT,9x, and a variety of linuxes) every day. All of them have strong points, and all of them have weak points. Being a little more objective never hurt anyone.
Read the article cited previously by Xenu. (http://www.fryberger.com/colors.html) If J. Average Consumer were to look at the PC, would they say that it was a brand new PC, or would they say "oh, it's one of them iMacs, gosh aren't they great/awful/cute/ugly?" Seems to me like there is precedent for this sort of thing, whether or not one likes Apple. There is a similay situation with not only the hourglass - shaped coke bottles, but also the word "coke." The Coca Cola company (among others) is very protective of the work Coke. They go as far as to hire people to go to restraunts and ask for "coke," then take samples of the beverage they are served. If it is in fact Coca Cola, fine. If it is Pepsi or some generic cola, they will go as far as taking the beverage serving establishment to court. They do this because there is a long standing precedent for protected trade names being allowed to keep their protection, and undefended trade names that get accepted as the common name for any item of the same type (eg, xerox rather than any old copier, kleenex rather than generic tissue, coke rather than generic cola beverage) can no longer be protected trade names. Has anyone else seen the latest batch of TV ads for Band-Aid brand bandages? That's exactly how they refer to them in the ad for the very same reason. Apple is merely doing the same thing with the visual cues of the iMac. After all, Intel came out with a whole slew of non-beige, non-cubic cases, and Apple doesn't care. Ditto several other companies dicussed here (http://slashdot.org/articles/99/01/30/1240206_F.
itachi
Go back to class, little monkey.
Ask your law or economics teachers what the term "trade dress" means.
Actually, the proliferation of "beige" in products is due, I am told, to an infamous study done earlier in this century (1940's?) by the Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (otherwise known as 3M), which determined that office workers surrounded by beige-colored objects were more productive than office workers surrounded by other-colored objects.
Since that time, most office equipment has come in innocuous shades of tan, beige, ecru, putty, what-have-you.
Areas where the Apple ][ did innovate include the first-ever structural plastic foam casing.
What Apple is doing is not "enabling computer ignorance", what Apple is doing is making low-level electronics and software engineering knowledge unnecessary for, and irrelevant to, the end-user. Your arguments have no basis in fact.
For a better understand of what is morally correct, try reading Robert Heinlein's "Starship Troopers"; it might open your eyes.
While you're spending so much time figuring out how to set those little dipshit switches and jumpers just to get your sound card (or whatever) to work, I'll be actually getting useful work done that expands the sum of human knowledge.
Apple doesn't need to expand their customers minds, what is need to do is help those customers expand their minds all by themselves by not getting in the way by requiring a user to know the difference between an IRQ and an I/O port.
I have an extremely high level of knowledge about computer systems, from mainframes down to the lowest-level desktop. I advise large organizations on technology purchases. When it came time to spend *my* money, I bought a Macintosh.
My current Mac (7500) is now four years old, and runs the latest system software release (Mac OS X Server 1.0/BeOS 4.5/Mac OS 8.6/MkLinux DR3 QUAD-BOOT). The only upgrade it ever got was a 604/120 card for $19.99.
Have you seen any four-year old 486/Pentium PC's running Windows 2000 effectively, or even *at all*?
That would only be relevant if the were actually a gap. The two designs are so similar as to be confusing to the consumer.
Making those "little details" irrelevant to the end-user does not make the end-user stupid; au contraire, it frees the mind to ponder other, much more important things.
Not that I have anything against learning about those details if they happen to be relevant to your life. They *are* relevant to mine, and that's why I've learned all about them; I take great offense at implications that I am somehow lacking in knowledge simply because I believe the Macintosh Way is a superior paradigm.
Did I forget to mention that I also have Virtual PC on my Mac which runs DOS, Windows 3.x, Windows 95, Windows 98, AND Windows NT, and any other operating system for Intel platforms that I decide to load? I will grant you that the larger systems don't run quickly, but they do run well enough for certain tasks. Sometimes Microsoft products turn out to be the best tool for the task at hand.
Knowledge is NOT power, and Power is not something one "has", it is something one generates. Knowledge is more like potential energy. Potential energy does not generate power; only kinetic energy can generate Power.
Power is a measure of energy output derived from the formula, Work divided by Time. Work is Force applied over (multiplied by) Distance. Force equals Mass times Acceleration. This is basic physics.
For the mathematically challenged, this means that the more Mass I Accelerate, or the quicker I Accelerate an equivalent Mass, the more Force I create. The more Force I apply over a greater Distance, the more Work I do. The more Work I do in a shorter period of Time, the more Power I generate.
Macintosh computers allow a person to accelerate more Mass, more quickly, over a greater Distance, in a shorter period of Time, than *any* other systems. Period.
Am I missing something? How is it that you think Apple computers are good for people who don't know "jack" about computers, and then go on to say that one would need "3 degrees and 30 reference books just to learn how to do the equivalent of basic operations on a PC", implying that this is what is necessary to operate a Macintosh?
I am more than capable of changing the oil in my car, as well as performing many other routine maintenance tasks on my car; however, my time is worth more than I pay my dealer to do these things for me. My car also does not have "infinite configurability", yet it seems to be quite useful, even without that feature.
...and your point is?
You have just supported Apple's case, actually.
>> Lot of people like the design of the iMac
EXACTLY! This rip-off isn't just a stylish PC, it's an exact rip-off of the iMac. Apple has spent a ton of money on advertising to make people dream of this little colorful plastic toy. Daewoo and the E-Power wouldn't have to spend a penny on advertising, since customers would walk into the store, recognize the distinctive shape of the iMac, the computer of their non-poweruser dreams, and buy it. There are a lot of stores out there that didn't even sell Macs until the iMac. If they could sell this imitation instead, they would.
The iMac is an innovation. The innovation is that a computer can be so attractive as to possess the minds of non-computer people to the extent that they start liking computers. When the iMac first came out, something like 80% of the people who bought it were people who had never owned a computer before. The PC makers have never been able to touch that kind of design appeal. They've made some ugly beige all-in-ones and they've made some sleek black or blue or marble boxes, but they're just not yummy like the iMac.
Would I ever buy an iMac or recommend one to anyone I cared about? Nope. I think it is underpowered and overpriced. Still, the iMac should be a lesson to the computer industry, especially the linux crowd. We, as computer geeks, have different priorities than 90% of the customers out there (in numbers, not $$$).
Nope, the french beat them at that.
The Citroen is the only car I've ever seen that reminds me of Jerry Lewis.
rip-off != clone
Here, I'll say it simply so you can get it.
It looks so damn similar that a non-computer person wouldn't know the difference. From a reasonable distance, people can't tell the difference. You've pointed out many technical differences and they are all 100% irrelevant to this lawsuit. You are thinking from a technical point of view, which is not the subject of this lawsuit. This lawsuit is about artistic design and design trademark.
It's as if someone made an exact replica of a Dodge Viper, put in a natural gas engine and changed all the Dodge emblems. They then name it the Hodge Rattler. While there are many examples of rip-offs like this that don't get any lawsuits, there are many that do.
Apple claims that they are selling a large percentage of iMacs to new computer buyers and a substantial percentage to people who previously owned PCs. There was quite about of media coverage when Apple published these percentages. Sorry I don't have a link. I know that they talked about it during the last Shareholders meeting. Given that information, there is no way for Future Power to claim that it isn't competing.
This looks like a great little box. If all of the pieces are Linux compatible, there's a great market opportunity here.
A good installation with Netscape, X11Amp, all the basic office apps installed and ready, the configuration targetted at this specific machine, ready to plug in a new user name and ISP dial up settings, this could be the perfect no-brain consumer Linux box.
RedHat or similar could jump on this and contract to reserve the red unit for Redhat sales only. Charge half of what MS does for a Windows license and let the PC vendor keep the difference to keep them excited as well...
As many people as there are who do -nothing- that isn't web-based, this could be a winner for everyone - a nicely controlled test deployment of Linux as a low-end consumer OS.
Almost every minivan on the road looks very similar to any other car.
Almost every jet in the air looks very similar to any other jet.
Almost every toaster in the kitchens looks very similar to any other toaster.
let's face it, copying the look of a successful product is the way the world works.
I don't know what the fsck you are smoking but it must be damned strong to ever coe to the conclusion that *any* release Win95 is more stable than the MacOS? My ass. I'll even go as far as to say that System 7.5 (no updates) is more stable than Win95D! Being an Apple Developer I have run alpha2 copies of assorted MacOS version and have found all of them to be more stable than Macroshit's lettered releases of Winblows. The only thing that I have that is more stable than my MacOS machines are my Linux boxes and my calculator (although there has been some debate about my Casio...)! You'd better go easy on that shit you're smoking. Rolling up M$ manuals and smoking can be bad for your health.
It does look like a cheap knock-off of the IMac. I wonder if intellectual property or even copywrite extends to the look and feel of a product. Most of the time anyone comes out with a new product, all th ecompetitors start copying the product and even the design. I guess that we shall have to wait and see.
Romanes eunt domus? People called Romanes, they go the 'ouse? It says Romans go home. No it doesn't. What's Latin fo
According to Future Power, the Epower (or whatever it's called) and the iMac don't compete because Apple sells the iMac to mac users and the Epower is for the "windows enthusiast". This isn't true becuause Apple has been selling the iMac to both wintel users and mac users. Furthermore, they both sell to people who don't own a computer yet. As for the "windows enthusiast", I didn't know such a beast existed. Can anyone confim or deny this for me?
-Dan
--- Don't ever trust a woman until she's dead- B.B. King
Why are they all beige in the first place? Because the Apple ][ was. They may not have the market-share, or marketing machine in place to attain such, but they're still one of the (if not THE) most innovative and visionary computer companies around. Period.
P.S. I'm a PC/Linux user, but props due to Apple.
"Anything you can do, I can do meta-." - Douglas R. Hofstadter
with a translucent case to me. Who created that terminal that Apple cloned anyway? Lear-Seigler, perhaps? Anyone remember?
Geeky modern art T-shirts
Part of design is color, in this particular case it's also translucent color and not solid. That's one of the earmarks of iMac design. Also it's clear that it's a total ripoff, from the keyboard to the all-in-one case design. This goes much deeper than 'chevy and ford' colors.
Let me put it another way. Say that you designed something revolutionary, and part of it's success was the fact that it took many separate parts and combined them into one easy to use package. Your product gets a reputation and a good deal of mindshare for it's advantages. Then Company Fong comes along and makes an exact replica. What will consumers think? Hey, this looks like the other product, it must be as easy to use as the original. Some people wouldn't even know there was a difference. So your company starts losing money because you're being undercut by a look alike with poorer quality. What would you do? Take them to court of course, because you spent megabucks researching, designing, and marketing your product and you're not about to let a cheap knockoff take your tiny share of the vast market.
To sum it all up, there's much more at stake here than just another pretty case.
"From the dawn of computers we have been trying to make interfaces more intuitive and easy for their operators to use." Precisely. Which is why Apple hooked up with Xerox to borrow pieces of their GUI originally. And why Microsoft went on to completely and blantantly rip off the MacOS GUI. Anything that's easier to use for the average moron (I'd say any american's iq hovers around 83) is better and will be more productive. Regardless of it's actual quality level.
"Not everybody needs to learn assembler...they should at least read the manuals though."
I agree with this statement aswell. However, if software is truly easy to use and intuitive (which are the twin hallmarks of excellence in GUI design), then you shouldn't even have to touch a manual. There are many programs on Macintosh that you can pick up and start playing with, after throwing the manual aside. Some Windoze programs are the same, as are a rare few Linux programs. But this is totally off topic and I think should be reserved for another day...
Yes you should expect a more refined OS and interface to perform better, as long as Microsoft isn't making it. I prefer Irix and KDE to Windoze myself because they're easy to use and intuitive. And the MacOS made learning Photoshop (I used to be an imaging professional) simple and elegant. I never had to worry about filename extensions or what program could open what file. Everything was integrated and truly plug and play. At the risk of this whole thread turning into some redundant mac vs. pc thing, I think I'll stop here.
I wonder what "Mr. Ethernet" would have to say about stability between some "has been" OS's like Unix and MacOS which are more mature compared to relatively new OS's like Windoze. That guy HAD to be joking. Either that or blindly spouting some 'newer is better' rhetoric.
I think the original comment missed the mark when using "layout" as an example. We're talking something "hard" here. If Chevy decided to make a Porsche 911 knockoff and call it a Chevy 119 they would definitly be open for some lawsuits. Daewoo is a pretty decent company... I'd of thought they could come up with something more original than an iMac copy. I just wish that Appple had taken a closer look at SGI's cases... now those are cool!
maschine
P.S. Don't let your dislike of Apple color your judgement... it's unbecoming.
Both Westfield and Ferrari have successfully sued companies in US courts that were making knockoffs of Lotus 7's and multiple Ferrari's. Some of the companies that lost were merely producing kitcars that had "resembalance" to the real things. Apple does have a case. (No pun intended :)
maschine
Hard Code,
Both Ferrari and Caterham (English company who purchased the rights from Lotus to produce the Lotus 7 sports car) Have both sued (and won)in US courts to prevent other companies from producing kitcars that were either identical or resembled products that the companies had produced in the past. Would you say that this has hurt Ferrari's reputation in the market?
Hard_code,
You know, you're the kind of user that gives Linux a bad name... Why do you even care about Apple, aren't they beneath your notice? Or is it that you're secretly a windows lover?
Correction: Caterham is the comapny that owns the rights to the Lotus 7 and they sued Westfield.
"I asked you this about the iMac clone:"
Gee, AArther.... I thought the computer in question was just that. Why are you referring it to an "iMac clone" if it isn't a copy?
The "Coca-Cola" bottle design ("the contour bottle") is trademarked or copyrighted (see www.coke.com/legal.html).
Maybe Apple was smart enough in the beginning to do this to the "all-in-one" design of the iMac.
Maybe not. Anyone know?
-m
Of course Apple will win. There are 3 possibilities:
:)
1) Future power settles low and revokes their design, seeing as they can't afford a tough legal battle with Apple
2) There is a prolonged legal battle, and Apple finally wins since Future Power's design is obviously stolen
3) There is a prolonged legal battle during which the courts order an injunction against Future Power shipping... thus causing them to lose market share and be unable to continue the suit
Any way you cut it, Apple wins
Venn ist das nurnstuck git und Slotermeyer? Ya! Beigerhund das oder die Flipperwaldt gersput!
Hey all,
There are a few people already who are comparing the current lawsuit to Apple suing GEM et al for being too AppleOS-like. I personally feel that Apple has a strong case this time as the design is copyrightable and any opposition has to make their design distint. This is also applicable to the various OS'es, *but* one could not go around copyrighting THE Graphical User Interfaces as an entity on its own. Therefore the GUI must be distinct on its own.
The same applies for the Imac case. I looked at the pretty pictures of both machines mentioned, and if I hadn't been told which was which, I doubt I could say who manufactured which one. This must surely prove that Apple is in the right.
From another point of view, this time music :
Whilst one could not copyright the chord of G, if you write a piece of music then the sequence of chords may not be reused by anyone else (within reason) without the copyright holders permission.
Now compare this to the casing issue.
Whilst one could not copyright a generic black case, if one was to design a stripy black case with a couple of sexy logos then that CAN be copyrighted and no one may use that design without your permission.
>The Case has nothing to do with the computer, it >is what is inside, and what you do with it that >counts.
Bollocks. Who want's some scabby coloured case for their pc when they could have one which actually looks good. I know that I may be no design guru, but I like to have my house looking nice... not like a technophobe's nightmare...
>Apple is doing nothing but enableing computer >ignonace. "Sure it is ok to be stupid at >computers, here a five year old can use this >computer, with a little help and hard work I bet >even you could use this computer"
Just accept it - some people are better at some things than other people are. I can program and I can play damn fine jazz, *but* I am no sportsman. One of my friends can also use computers and is really sporty, *but* he cannot even count in time (in the musical sense). Then there's my mother who could never use a computer just because... well, I don't know. She's really clever, don't get me wrong, but she has enough trouble using the video player...
Now, you I take it can use computers, and you obviously look down on Macintoshes for being so easy. I personally don't like Macs because in my experience they are just too damn inflexible. My current machine is a SuSE 5.0x box and I like it because I can do anything I want to. However, if I was to sit my mother down in front of it, she'd have a breakdown, I'm sure of it. As it is though, when she does need to word process a document, she can just about do it on a Mac without any help from me.
So what's the problem ?
"We're talking something "hard" here. If Chevy decided to make a Porsche 911 knockoff and call it a Chevy 119 they would definitly be open for some lawsuits."
What if Mazda came out with a little low slung two seater car that it called the "Roadster", and then later Porsche came out with a little low slung two seater car that it called the "Boxster"? And suppose every other car manufacturer in the world started coming out with little low slung two seaters. Would that be theft as well?
You might argue that "the insides are different", but the insides of the iMac and this other machine are pretty different too. They just happen to look rather similar. Unless this PC clone company directly copied the blueprints for the design, it isn't theft, and as long as they are not trying to confuse the iMac with their own machine it isn't a violation of trademark.
P.S. Don't let your Apple Myopia color your judgement...
Is *this* Apple's response to EVERYTHING?
How immature and bratty. It just shows that Jobs wants Apple to be more a primadonna than to actually develop cool technology (which I don't think anything of that nature has been done since Woz left). Here's an idea: instead of relying on shiny plastic to sell your product, what about perhaps including cool technology that copycats CAN'T beat?
Apple, at a time when you desperately need to reinvent your image, you get no respect for this.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
> If this flies I am going out and start my own
> web site, and call it Slashdit, complete with
> exact copies of the page layout, news stories
> and everything.
And you know what? You're FREE to. But unless your site has better CONTENT (content is the key here), nobody will care. TONS of sites are set up like Slashdot (the ubiquitous "weblog" format). Each has content appealing to its target audience. Slashdot isn't Slashdot because of perty pictures and layout (although Rob does pour tons of effort into making this great)...it's Slashdot because of its discussion. CAN Apple throw a fit and sue people over this? Yes, probably. Will it make them look good, like they're a part of the computing community they purportedly serve...not to me. Yes Apple has been ripped off in the past. But whining can't replace real innovation and. By fervently fighting this, Apple is making the stand and the statement that they are a company that sells curvy plastic cases, and not technology.
I think Apple should be spending time porting MacOS instead of squabbling over their different-thinking plastic casing.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Probably. Did they get the approval of *Ghandi's* or *Einstein's* estate to use them to sell their computers (which really sorta turns my stomach)? THAT I would like to know.
I don't mind Jeff Goldblum selling they're stuff though. Dead people can't make decisions about products though. It's just co-opting a meme.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
No. NEITHER is innovation as far as I'm concerned.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
> Bollocks. Who want's some scabby coloured case
> for their pc when they could have one which
> actually looks good. I know that I may be no
> design guru, but I like to have my house looking
> nice... not like a technophobe's nightmare...
I do. I want a scabby, ugly-ass, stupid-looking case, as long as the *contents* meet my requirements. If the contents do meet my requirements then a nicer case is a superficial thing...if the one I have doesn't work or scares technophobes whose opinions I happen to care about might change it. I won't pay a premium just for a look. I could shop at Gap if I wanted to do that.
Although the "Apple-is-enabling-ignorance" is somewhat true, it really isn't a relevant argument. From the dawn of computers we have been trying to make interfaces more intuitive and easy for their operators to use. Given population distribution, this would seem to indicate that at least some of them would have to be oversimplified (not everybody is a techie). Not everybody needs to learn assembler...they should at least read the manuals though.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
> Everyone seems to be missing this point...
> The iMac represented a computer that was
> designed from the start to be easy to use for
> anyone.
And therefore nobody should follow suit and attempt to design a computer that is easy to use for everybody from the start? Come on. I don't get what your "point" is. Apple's creed has been the above since it's inception. Therefore the iMac is not innovative. Yeah it has an All In One case, but as you say, they did that before, like a decade ago.
> It also represented an attempt to make the
> computer a more fashionable accesory in the
> home, not just a beige box with wires
> everywhere...
Well, no. An AIO unit was the solution to the wire problem (regardless of manufacturer). You can get AIO VCR/TV combos for this purpose. Yes, it did attempt to make it more fashionable...but umm...I still don't see how this procludes others from doing the same. There is nothing new about trying to make something intuitive and fashionable. If they have a patent, which proves they actually invented something, then they could probably win this...regardless of how it would make them look to consumers.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
> How would you like it if Microsoft made a ripoff
> of the linux kernel, called it Billinux and used
> it to compete with linux?
I WOULD like it. I would LOVE it. They CAN. It's GPLed. Go ahead Microsoft. Attempt to make a better product. Doesn't look like you've tried that in a while. Everybody wins in that case! More options, more freedom, more software. My guess, though, is that Microsoft, for various reasons, would not, or could not, pull it off.
> What this dumbass company has done is no
> different than copying a book or magazine's
> entire layout and claiming credit for it
Um, so what. I don't read books and magazine's for their layout, do you? Do you read NewsWeek and say, "Wow, this layout is so informative and educational"??? Go ahead magazines. Copy each other's formats. I'll pick the one with the best content.
> this is about a blatant copy of the design of
> the iMac and marketing it like that PC company
> came up with the design.
Perhaps...but I don't think anybody really believes they came up with it. If Apple stops marketing it like it was brilliant and innovative, then PC companies can stop pretending they came up with it.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
> And you know what? I'm FREE to break into your
> apartment and steal your computer. But unless I
> can sell your computer for a decent PRICE, it
> won't be worthwhile.
Um, I don't get where you got that analogy from...how is replicating the format of a site with custom content the same as breaking into the site, stealing the code and then reselling it as your own? BTW, you're not FREE to break into my apartment. You are FREE to make a site called Slashdit and replicate the Slashdot format and post your *OWN* content. In fact, I think Rob has gratiously released the Slashdot engine.
The CORRECT analogy would be that you are FREE to look at my computer, guess at how it was built and designed, replicate it, and THEN sell it for a better price. In reality it is very difficult to do this.
> Do you have a job? Do you do homework at your
> school (you are so clueless, you must be a
> student)?
Are the petty comments really necessary?
> I suppose we're FREE to steal your work
Well, *I'd* gladly let you TAKE it (and not claim it as your own...even GPLed source retains copyrights I believe), but it probably technically belongs to my employer.
> Because after all, you should be spending
> time doing work instead of squabbling over
> people claiming your work as their own.
Yes you are right, I should be. That is what a copyright ensures. I'd let you TAKE it and even USE it if you didn't claim you originated it. Actually I have a freeware page and, drum roll, I let people TAKE my work.
The obvious analogy is that PC makers are somehow claiming that they originated the design. Given Apple's marketing, the success of the iMac, and the lameness of the copy, it is not really even feasible for them to attempt this...that it is so obvious precludes any deception.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
if neither is innovatIVE then neither is AN innovatION
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
There's one problem with making low-level electronics, filesystem details, etc. not relevant to the end-user: it makes people STUPID. Not stupid about everything, it just ensures that Apple's user base is comprised mostly of people who have no idea, and who don't care, what's in their computer, and what the differences are between their hardware and other hardware.
All users should have at least some knowledge about their hardware, at least for the basis of comparison. You can argue all you like about how my computer is a bitch to configure, how DIP switches and jumpers piss you off, but if there's one thing I learned, it's that the harder it is, the more you learn. Same thing goes for Linux: the learning curve is very steep, so at first you have this feeling of powerlessness, but as you overcome those early problems, you empower yourself more and more with knowledge.
I've always believed that you should HAVE to learn stuff about the machine you're working on in order to use it properly, and I feel that it IS sad that Apple tries to make their computers (and their OS) idiot-friendly. I like knowing the difference between an IRQ and an I/O port. I like knowing the difference between SCSI and IDE. Knowledge IS power. And the more you try to make thing easy to use, the less power you actually have.
Check out the article at Ziff-Davis for side by side images of the two machines.
Given one hour to live, the student replied: "I'd spend it with professor FP who can make an hour seem like a lifetime."
Apple has every right to defend their patented and trademarked produts. They spent time, effort, and lots of money designing a unique and brilliant machine.
There are inumerable futuristic designs that Future Power could create for their product, they could even make it translucent - they don't have to steal Apple's design.
The point here is not features, or Win vs Mac, it is someone trying to use another's product after the first did all the work to bring it to market - not to mention all the legal infringements Future Power is making.
I'm sorry you don't get it. It is not about translucency - it's the whole package. Many companies make translucent products, but Future Power is the only one that has designed a product that is almost identical in every way to the iMac with the intention of playing off the iMac's success. The iMac design is patented and trademarked. This has been infringed upon and should not be allowed to continue morally or legally.
:)
As far as price/performance, etc.: The Mac has a small price premium, but with that you get better quality components. PC markets are saturated with bargain-basement components that fail on a regular basis. You get what you pay for.
Speed: This PC iMac knock-off does have a higher clock rate, that is true, but clock speed does not tell the whole story. PowerPC processors can process 2-3 more instructions per clock cycle than Pentium class processors can. This is why in real world and benchmark tests, the 333MHz iMac is on par with 450MHz PII machines. You should see what it can do when you pop Linux on it!
i'm terribly impressed that you realize that the TAM was really the first production flat panel all-in-one... you're the only person outside of the Mac Holy that seems to realize this...
/dev/null no one can hear you scream."
not much of a surprise though that Apple innovated that too....Apple should protect what's theirs..
"In
In
yeah, you can get a clear, fly case for your laptop. Err.. well, if you own an Apple Powerbook 2400c/180, and live in japan. The japanese are so crazy about these old powerbooks they make 'skeleton' cases for them that are translucent colors -or- clear. A couple of pages 'out there' have pics and instructions on how to make your own translucent cases. just fyi...
In
I don't think apple can win, they didn't when they sued microsoft over stealing the "look and feel" of the interface. Althought this does hold the prospect of being more damaging than GUI design...
Yes, the definition of copyright laws are changing constantly as new precedent is established by court cases such as the Gucci watch one. While Apple may have lost the case against Microsoft over Mac OS and Windows, this case will probably be won by Apple. The E-Power machines will probably sell, though, just because of the popularity of the iMac. Clearly, that's why E-Power designed their cases like that. And that's why Apple is suing.
And no computing experience would be as smooth and consistent if not for Apple. In my opinion, Mac OS is still one of the best GUIs in this respect. It has been improved upon for the last 15 years, and each update has made the experience much more pleasant. I think that this is innovation at its best. The iMac symbolizes the ease of use that is to be expected from Apple.
"All software that isn't free sucks." - RMS
With an attitude like that, many of the M$ only drones won't be converted.
---Got Coffee?---
How would you like it if Microsoft made a ripoff of the linux kernel, called it Billinux and used it to compete with linux? What this dumbass company has done is no different than copying a book or magazine's entire layout and claiming credit for it. I hope they lose big time because this isn't about look and feel, this is about a blatant copy of the design of the iMac and marketing it like that PC company came up with the design.
---Got Coffee?---
The only japanese cars that look anything alike are of course different models made by the same company. I can tell an american car because it looks like 75% of the other cars in the parking lot and is ugly as hell. I can tell a japanese car because the designs are very different from american or other japanese cars, and they aren't ugly like american cars. American car companies only have 1 thing that they are the best at, making the ugliest cars in the world.
---Got Coffee?---
I have R4.5 installed and its gui is very different from MacOS's.
---Got Coffee?---
i have to agree with both of the previous responses (despite the fact that i always seem to be futilely defending gui's.) that old arguement that you shouldn't know how computers work and that you should just be able to use them is a little ridiculous at this point. most people are so far removed from the actual interactions with the tools that they use every day that it makes me fear for people's toilets overflowing or light bulbs burning out. don't be owned by your machine and don't be so all fired self righteous for not knowing about something.
i'm not really that excited but, hey pal, that's life in the breakdown lane.
Can you imagine if some car manufacturer came out with a car that looked just like a VW Beetle? Obviously, VW would sue the pants off the company and everyone would think nothing of that.
Why the heck would it be any different for the industrial design of a computer?
I think becasue the notion of actually spending big R&D on having a unique industrial design to a computer is still so new, that a lot of people don't grasp it. To anyone seeing a VW Beetle knock-off, it would be so blatently obvious. To most people with any common sense, one look at the e-power machine and you know its a blatent rip-off of Apple's design.
Comparing this law suit to Apple's old lawsuit against Microsoft doesn't hold any water. Apple had previously signed an agreement with Microsoft that they COULD use a lot of Apple's technology. If you know the history, you know that to many it was considered one their biggest blunders. [As you probably know too, MS just recently "invested" in Apple which was more a resolution in patent disputes among other things to the tune of 150 million dollars].
Pittsburghers don't have a handler installed for SIGTURN.
Have you seen any four-year old 486/Pentium PC's running Windows 2000 effectively, or even *at all*?
;) :/
First thing I'd love to see a 4 year old 486 (aside from the new designs of them, the kind that are a whole computer in the space of a 3.5" drive) .
Second, Win2K is so bloated (I don't need to SEE it to verify, it should be basic knowledge by now) that, while logically that 486 *should* run anything you throw at it, it cannot because of all the garbage that Microsoft (and others I'm sure) have thrown in there "for the good of the customers".
Thirdly, I *am* sitting next to a 486 machine right now. I'm not using it because it has a 14.4 modem in it and I can ill afford a new one. This 486 I have had for many years. It was bought when the DX2 and VLB were the latest technologies.
It has 95 on it, and would have RH 5.2 as well except for the small problem of a 230meg drive.
It runs 95, and considering how bloated and buggy THAT is I'd say it does fairly well. It only takes it 4 more seconds to get Win up and running on it than on this beast I'm using now (loading all the same stuff as this machine, a PII-200 clone).
Apple computers have their place, yes. Their place is for the people who don't know jack about comput(ers/ing). Or it's for those who are just frankly too stupid to learn about what they bought, you know the same people who pay $400 for an oil change in their car because they know nothing about it? Or it's for those who port a useable (read: infinately configurable) OS to the Apple/Mac architecture.
I have not much respect for a computer you need 3 degrees and 30 reference books just to learn how to do the equivalent of basic operations on a PC. All the same I hope Apple beats the living shit out of those clone bastards in court. I personally hate the iMac concept as a whole but it is wrong to just outright steal it.
That is the only way to put it. The iMac lookalike is a much superior machine at about the same price. If you haden't noticed the G3 FPU performs at the level of a 233 MHz Celeron (Without Cache)in a 333MHz G3.
No I am not a Mac bigot, I can't wait for the G4, but the G3 is worse then x86.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Well, the mouse is actually a little bit different; it's not a circle. At this point I don't know whose side I'm on - after all, the beige box has been 'cloned' endlessly. But the beige box was never designed to get people to buy the product, which, presumably, the iMac was. I guess that'd be the difference, but in the end, does it really matter? The user bases are completely different.
"Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try."
Because they'll probably have to sue in every country in the world. At the Computex show (here in Taipei), I only saw ONE case company NOT making iMac clones. BTW, my wife works at that company and I think their newest cases are pretty snazzy....look kinda like the old BeBox!)
Ah, but I HAVE, grasshopper. But we're talking LOOK and FEEL, right?
Just wondering....did Apple get permission from the estate of George Orwell for the 1984 Superbowl "Big Brother is Watching You" ad?
You're refering of course to the quality of the American-made Apple "NapalmBook"?
FYI, Apple Powerbooks are now made by Quanta....in Taiwan. I guess Apple learned something.
BTW, I AM an American...I just get pissed off watching Americans getting ripped off by US companies, both in price AND quality.
The problem as I see it is that Orwell's estate is based in the UK whereas Einstein's is in the US (Princeton U.?).
Foreigners in copyright cases generally have a much harder time in US Federal Court...for example take a look at J.R.R. Tolkien's legal battles with US publisher (pirate) Ace Books. Ballantine Books (US) had to take them to court and it still years for the case to be resolved. And Tolkien still got screwed.
There's a company in the States that makes a NASTY softdrink called "American Cola". What's tricky about them is that the can is Coke red with Coke style script. It's not sold in the States, it's exported. In countries where people either don't speak English or don't use the Roman alphabet, people think "Ah, Coke!". They are able to compete with Coke at places like tourist attractions, bus and train stations. This swill tastes so bad NO ONE would want to have a second one. But you see, this is an AMERICAN company. Not Korean, not Chinese,not Mongolian....American. And they've been exporting this crap for at least 10 years.
I wonder why the US government and Coke ignore it?
BTW, in case you're wondering how they can export soft drinks from the States and still compete locally, it's because in many counries, sugar is a government monopoly and it's (high) price controlled by the government.
Apple filed against Microsoft in March, 1988....they asked for $5.5 billion in damages. US District Judge Vaughn Walker threw out the majority of Apple's claims in April, 1992. After 2 years of appeals, the case died.
Apple had to pay more than $10 million in legal bills.
I might be wrong, but didn't Apple start the beige trend that they decided to kill with the iMac?
In the auto industry, this would be a no contest win for a compnay like Apple. Say the GM decided to *clone* (not mimic) a car with distinctive styling (say, the new VW beetle) with cheaper parts. You bet your ass that VW would sue GM and win, and nobody here would be surprised. Because of this, I can't understand all the fuss here.
The sad thing about the whole thing is that PC manufacturers aside from Apple are too cheap to invest any real effort into creative design, so they end up ripping off Apple's efforts when they are successful instead of coming up with something of their own.
I sincerely hope Apple wins this one.
just my blog and pix
Yes, I heard this argument since years: "I want to know how my computer works." People used to say that when the Mac came out and it didn't have a shell: "I want to know what happens when I copy a file." Well, you still don't. The only difference between typing "copy a:\*.* c:\" and dragging an icon from a floppy to the icon of the hard disk is that the dragging is easier to understand and faster because you do not type the command in 3 times because of typos. In the end you do still not know how that stuff reaches the hard disk - you just can hope that it really is there.
It's the representation that is different and more intuitive on the Mac. Who is still using DOS so he can pretend to know how his/her computer works? Now everybody is using Windows - isn't it funny?
Searching and plugging in jumpers to configure IRQs does not really tell you how your computer works either - only if you do it wrong it won't work as you expect it to. How sophisticated!
If the monitor doesn't work on a Mac, then you can be sure that the graphics card doesn't work - there are no jumpers that can be in the wrong places.
Ignorant are those who think that everybody has to understand how a computer works - they are wrong.
A computer is a tool (for work, for entertainment), a commodity. These things are supposed to work and most people really do not care how. Those people need a computer to do their work and not to work on the computer until it works.
Ignorant are also those that do not see that there are indeed computers that comply very heavily to this ideal - the Mac for "ordinairy" people and the different flavours of Unix on the other. The majority out there lives with a bad copy of either of them.
Getting rid of all exclamation marks in the event log of Win NT? I gave up - my machine works but I wonder why.
If you are so sure how a computer works, then I want to know from you where each and every electron goes and why it does so. If you can explain to me how a processor works and how information is kept in memory it starts getting interesting because that is the underhood knowledge that you are talking about. Not the jumpers and DIP-switches.
What do you like better? To get a row of 300 numbers of your favourite stock or a nice graph? The best information is worth nothing if the representation sucks. The fastest Xeon system doesn't help you much if you got IRQ problems. It's smarter not to even have the chance to get them, right?
Apple can win this lawsuit despite losing to Microsoft, for one basic reason: the two lawsuits are based on entirely different legal reasoning.
u rs.html
Apple lost the Microsoft suit because they had signed a contract saying that Microsoft could use some of the features of the Mac OS in a Windows product. They have of course not signed any such document with Future Power.
There are two legal tactics Apple could use, according to computer and intellectual property law specialist Curtis E. Karnow. The first is "trade dress," which covers the distinctive appearance of a product and its association with a certain company in the minds of consumers. The classic example of this is the distinctive appearance of the Coca Cola bottle. Trade dress is very difficult to prove, however, since you have to prove that consumers could be confused.
The other tactic Apple could take is dilution of trademark. From MacWeek:
" `Apple could charge Future Power with trademark dilution, which is much easier to prove than trade dress,' Karnow said. Proof of trademark dilution requires no substantive documentation of any confusion customers might experience when they see a product that looks much like the iMac."
Apple certainly has the iMac designs trademarked (and probably has design patents too), so this would be a relatively easy case to win.
For more information, see:
http://macweek.zdnet.com/1999/06/27/epower.html
http://macweek.zdnet.com/1999/06/27/imacaliketh
-Roger Ford
remove NOSPAM from email to reply
What I find remarkable is that not only did they copy the case but also the keyboard. Why they would to that I don't know as I would hate to type on it all day (yes, I have used the iMac keyboard and though I like the machine the keyboard is just a pain) so it's hardly for aesthetic reasons they did so. I think they just wanted to leech off the design, plain and simple. It's just business. And what about the colours? Damn if that isn't a dead giveaway! Wonder what mouse if comes with :)