You'll see there that, prior to the announcement of the iphone, Samsung had produce many bar-touchscreen designs. The iphone is similar to some of them, (since they were first), while some are more obviously just ancestors of the Galaxy S. Models like the Slide and F700 (of which I had one, prior to the announcement of the iphone) very obviously evolved into the Galaxy S.
A great comparison is the car market. In Australia, there are arguments amongst car enthusiasts (see: Bogans) about which is better between the (Ford) Falcon and the (Holden) Commodore. Both 'camps' are just as one-eyed and ranting mad as the Apple vs Samsung camps. (And in both situations, I look at them and think "WTF? It's just a car/phone" and get a completely different brand so that I don't have to be tarred with the same brush. (Hell, I'm using a frickin' SONY atm to avoid those two!
Suddenly 1988 came around and both companies took the evolutionary process of gasp Rounding the corners! at the same time, with the 1988 Falcon and Commodore getting the same rounded, streamlined look.
I'm sorry, but while I still have a deep-seated sympathy for Apple from the days when they were the underdog vs MS, in this case they are abusing process and being vexatious over a very logical and common design evolution.
But I bet you're one of the people who say the CSIRO is a patent troll for putting their radar-tweaking technology ideas into a way to solve problems with wifi signals.
Ahh, got you. I thought he was meaning that all of our laws were merely a copy of the UK ones.
If laws haven't been enacted here, we do look at precedents set in other states, then other countries. The UK and the US being some of the more obvious examples. In this case, however, the Australian Telecommunications Act already covers these things and is quite unlike the UK version.
But ultimately, the political parties usually have their own agenda. If we looked at more forward-thinking countries and our origins in the UK, we'd have things like Civil Unions here instead of arguments about them.
I'm embarrassed by how backwards my own home-state (South Australia) is. Having been founded by a British Act of parliament in 1834 to become a virtual Britian-in-Australia (and the only state to never have been a penal colony), it went on to be so forward thinking as to be the first place to introduce a secret ballot for government elections; the second place in the world to give women the right to vote (The Kiwis beat us by a year); the first place to allow women the right to run for parliament; the first part of the British Empire to legalise Trade Unions; The first state in Australia to prohibit discrimation based on race, colour, country of origin, gender or marital status; the first state in Australia to decriminalise homosexuality; the first state in Australia to make rape in marriage a criminal offence; the first state in Australia to implement a 'container deposit' recycling system (currently 10c refund per can/bottle/milk carton); and the first state in Australia to ban plastic shopping bags
Since then, it has lead the country in going backwards. It was the first state in Australia to criminalise anonymous free political speech just a couple of years ago (which was reversed on public backlash); the state that denied Australia the R18+ rating on computer games; Is behind the eastern states in its stance on civil unions; the list goes on.
So... Let's hope they don't continue their backwards tradition and suddenly ban/censor SMS or mobile communications or something stupid. >.>
I'd love to argue with you and point out instances where you're mistaken, but I'm buggered if I can.
Between our Patriot-Act-inspired anti-terrorism laws that came in for our good buddy Dubbya; our support for ACTA; our one-sided Free Trade Agreement which screws ourselves; and now the US Marines base in the Northern Territory (because Woomera wasn't enough).
Well, we've effectively ceded control over ourselves to the US.
I'm all for supporting our allies, and the US provides us with great protection, but we're legislating ourselves into being conquered.
Australian law is, I believe, based on English law.
Back during the colonial days and original formation of the states, this was true. But once the states were formed, they were given limited independence to create their own laws (which had to be approved by the Crown at the time, such as with South Australia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australia_Act_1834 )
Full Independence was granted years later, and we now make our own laws as we see fit. Some of them logical, some of them even more fucked up than ever.
The big problem is you are basing your opinion on factually incorrect information.
Marriage wasn't a religious concept. It was originally a civil concept for the merger of familes. Love and Religion weren't even on the radar for a while.
Christianity specifically wanted nothing to do with marriage until the mid 6th Century. Prior to that, they washed their hands of it.
On the subject of same-sex marriage, well, that's only restoring rights that were taken away. Same-sex marriages exist throughout history prior to the involvement of the churches. In the Roman Empire, there are records that at least 2 emperors married men. One of them, Nero, married men twice, including taking the role of 'wife.'
As a divorced guy, I have to say that I think everyone has an equal right to the utter misery of marriage. =p
However, I've heard Random People On The Internet talk about reduced insulin production (but not lack of production, which would be type I) being an issue in type II as well.
That sounds like Diabetes LADA (Latent Autoimmune Diabetes in Adults), which people often nickname "Type 1.5"
Interestingly, family history is still a factor, but it's family history of autoimmune disorders rather than diabetes. In my case, my father has a type of vasculitis that causes his immune system to attack non-vital parts of his own body (veins, bloody vessels, lungs and kidneys - nobody needs them), and after inheriting the flawed genes, my own immune system decides that the insulin-producing beta cells in my pancreas are the enemy.
That leaves me with all of the 'benefits' of Types I and II, effectively. I get all of the fun of calculating and injecting doses of insulin, while none of the weight-loss! Lucky me.
If I could only have been Type II DM. Then I could just take a pill and diet.
Firstly, yes, I'm sure it does cost tens of millions. I didn't want to risk exaggerating the figures, however. Without access to financial reports, any figure I quote would be akin to pulling a figure out of my arse.
Secondly, some components are designed for specific models, and the first time something is engineered there are no off-the-shelf components. A self-levelling-leg wouldn't be something they could suddenly order, for example. If they decide they want that feature and it hasn't been done before, they design it.
Thirdly, yes, clean room can be done from specifications. It can also be done by having 2 teams; One to reverse-engineer the original and see what makes it tick, then describe it to a second team that has never touched or seen the insides of the original. Compaq's reverse engineering of IBM's BIOS is a perfect example of this scenario.
Fourthly, not my intention at all. Yes, there are original ideas conceived in Korea, I was simply drawing a comparison to a scenario I was familiar with as I was amused that Samsung was being accused of similar. Ultimately Samsung differs in this example in that they produced an item that had superior elements in some areas. The LG example produced an inferior quality that, yes, walked across the floor because it rattled so badly when hitting its 1800rpm spin. (They felt that the counterbalancing in the German product was over engineered and possibly didn't take into consideration that "Average Joe" doesn't ensure their machines are level.)
I note another post from you indicates that the Germans don't see this in an offensive fashion. I guess that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery then, and my feelings are just misplaced loyalty and overcompensation. Because if you weren't correct - if the Germans felt threatened by these tactics - that there'd be a lot of legal proceedings that would result in product bans.;-)
Heh, I'm well aware of that. It sucks for the companies investing in the R&D, but I'm not going to complain as an end-user.
If it wasn't for reverse-engineering and clean-room techniques, I'd not be typing this on a derivative of an IBM Clone that cost mere hundreds of dollars. I'd either be using a hideously expensive IBM, or derivative of some other open design that might have come along instead.
They spend hundreds of thousands in engineering a new feature, testing it and ensuring it will last long term. A company in a country that doesn't protect IP then buys the German product for, say, $1k and then copies it. Said company's R&D costs are now ~$1k.
Innovation is important, but if a product can be blatantly copied and then sold to undercut the innovator, then why invest to innovate?
It's surely just coincidental that my example and the article are concerning Korean companies, of course.
That's not an uncommon tactic with Korean manufacturers, however.
I once worked on some high-quality, German engineered washing machines. It was discovered that, rather than spend hundreds of thousands on R&D, LG Electronics bought one of these units, disassembled it and copied it feature-for-feature albeit with minor design modifications.
The result? A washer that boasted the same features, yet "walked" across the floor during the spin cycle.
There were no legal breaches by LG in cleanrooming like that. I guess Samsung just pushed the envelope a bit far in the aesthetics department.
And moving from the "traditionally strong" password to employing XKCD's suggestions, I go from 2.29 Minutes on the "Massive Cracking Array Scenario" to 1.07 million trillion trillion trillion centuries.
I just have to hope that nobody comes around with a $5 wrench...
Well, actually I find this rather boring and unimpressive.
I can remember the days when every Mhz made a difference and you had to turn off Turbo for some programmes.
Back then, reaching 100Mhz was a huge milestone; But then the GigaHertz wars began.
It was actually interesting to see how well someone overclocked their Celeron 300A or their Athlons. As the Mhz crept up to 500Mhz, 600Mhz, 700Mhz, we were all getting excited, waiting for the day that one of the x86 giants would hit the Holy Grail of 1,000Mhz!
Then Intel threw their hands up in the air and went "Fuck it!" and pushed the P4 bullshit; clock speed became meaningless as the Athlons ran rings around the P4 despite the significantly higher clock speeds of the P4s.
Since then, it's largely a non-event. The architectures are so different that MHz/GHz ratings aren't useful to compare between brands - not like when you could know that an AMD 80486 DX40 was going to be faster than the (more expensive) Intel 80486 DX33. (Anyone remember the disdain and contempt the brands and magazines pushed on the Bus multipliers back then? "Don't buy a 486 DX2 50! It's clock multiplied! Buy a real 486 DX 50 instead!")
So, yeah... Compared to the days where someone would brag about a stable overclock of x MHz more than stock, these e-peen measuring contents for the highest GHz is nothing more than being a total tosser. Show it actually running stably and applications, or I couldn't care less.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't you watch South Park?
I hope you don't have any Apple products or software on your system...
You need to hang around with people who eat more insoluble fibre.
Umm... Yes?
Sorry if it's wrong, I'm in Oz and can only guess. But hey, it's a 50/50 chance so I took a stab at it.
I'm one of those 17, and just for that purpose.
:-)
I've never made a Google+ posting, but it's great to have the backup of my photos!
But they did.
From TFA: http://allthingsd.com/files/2012/07/samsung_designs.jpg
You'll see there that, prior to the announcement of the iphone, Samsung had produce many bar-touchscreen designs. The iphone is similar to some of them, (since they were first), while some are more obviously just ancestors of the Galaxy S. Models like the Slide and F700 (of which I had one, prior to the announcement of the iphone) very obviously evolved into the Galaxy S.
A great comparison is the car market. In Australia, there are arguments amongst car enthusiasts (see: Bogans) about which is better between the (Ford) Falcon and the (Holden) Commodore. Both 'camps' are just as one-eyed and ranting mad as the Apple vs Samsung camps. (And in both situations, I look at them and think "WTF? It's just a car/phone" and get a completely different brand so that I don't have to be tarred with the same brush. (Hell, I'm using a frickin' SONY atm to avoid those two!
In the late 70s and early 80s, both the Falcon/Fairmont and the Commodore/Calais had the typical 'boxy' look of a 70s car.
Suddenly 1988 came around and both companies took the evolutionary process of gasp Rounding the corners! at the same time, with the 1988 Falcon and Commodore getting the same rounded, streamlined look.
I'm sorry, but while I still have a deep-seated sympathy for Apple from the days when they were the underdog vs MS, in this case they are abusing process and being vexatious over a very logical and common design evolution.
But I bet you're one of the people who say the CSIRO is a patent troll for putting their radar-tweaking technology ideas into a way to solve problems with wifi signals.
Yes. He should fuck off without any adapters. ;-)
(insert joke about M/F, M/M and F/F adapters here)
That's good. We're already evidently competing with the Canadians to become the 51st state. We don't want more competition ;)
since the 70s. Gah, I shouldn't be slashdotting at 2am on a Tuesday morning.
Sadly, it's probably the most progressive thing the 70s. (1975 decriminalised homosexuality; 1976 declared rape-in-marriage a criminal act).
So the old joke about "Please set your watch back 30 years" upon landing in Adelaide is being kind by 5 years.
The US Military is too afraid that we'll send The Wiggles there permanently to even consider an invasion.
Ahh, got you. I thought he was meaning that all of our laws were merely a copy of the UK ones.
If laws haven't been enacted here, we do look at precedents set in other states, then other countries. The UK and the US being some of the more obvious examples. In this case, however, the Australian Telecommunications Act already covers these things and is quite unlike the UK version.
But ultimately, the political parties usually have their own agenda. If we looked at more forward-thinking countries and our origins in the UK, we'd have things like Civil Unions here instead of arguments about them.
I'm embarrassed by how backwards my own home-state (South Australia) is. Having been founded by a British Act of parliament in 1834 to become a virtual Britian-in-Australia (and the only state to never have been a penal colony), it went on to be so forward thinking as to be the first place to introduce a secret ballot for government elections; the second place in the world to give women the right to vote (The Kiwis beat us by a year); the first place to allow women the right to run for parliament; the first part of the British Empire to legalise Trade Unions; The first state in Australia to prohibit discrimation based on race, colour, country of origin, gender or marital status; the first state in Australia to decriminalise homosexuality; the first state in Australia to make rape in marriage a criminal offence; the first state in Australia to implement a 'container deposit' recycling system (currently 10c refund per can/bottle/milk carton); and the first state in Australia to ban plastic shopping bags
Since then, it has lead the country in going backwards. It was the first state in Australia to criminalise anonymous free political speech just a couple of years ago (which was reversed on public backlash); the state that denied Australia the R18+ rating on computer games; Is behind the eastern states in its stance on civil unions; the list goes on.
So... Let's hope they don't continue their backwards tradition and suddenly ban/censor SMS or mobile communications or something stupid. >.>
I'd love to argue with you and point out instances where you're mistaken, but I'm buggered if I can.
Between our Patriot-Act-inspired anti-terrorism laws that came in for our good buddy Dubbya; our support for ACTA; our one-sided Free Trade Agreement which screws ourselves; and now the US Marines base in the Northern Territory (because Woomera wasn't enough).
Well, we've effectively ceded control over ourselves to the US.
I'm all for supporting our allies, and the US provides us with great protection, but we're legislating ourselves into being conquered.
Back during the colonial days and original formation of the states, this was true. But once the states were formed, they were given limited independence to create their own laws (which had to be approved by the Crown at the time, such as with South Australia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australia_Act_1834 )
Full Independence was granted years later, and we now make our own laws as we see fit. Some of them logical, some of them even more fucked up than ever.
The big problem is you are basing your opinion on factually incorrect information.
Marriage wasn't a religious concept. It was originally a civil concept for the merger of familes. Love and Religion weren't even on the radar for a while.
Christianity specifically wanted nothing to do with marriage until the mid 6th Century. Prior to that, they washed their hands of it.
On the subject of same-sex marriage, well, that's only restoring rights that were taken away. Same-sex marriages exist throughout history prior to the involvement of the churches. In the Roman Empire, there are records that at least 2 emperors married men. One of them, Nero, married men twice, including taking the role of 'wife.'
As a divorced guy, I have to say that I think everyone has an equal right to the utter misery of marriage. =p
That sounds like Diabetes LADA (Latent Autoimmune Diabetes in Adults), which people often nickname "Type 1.5"
Interestingly, family history is still a factor, but it's family history of autoimmune disorders rather than diabetes. In my case, my father has a type of vasculitis that causes his immune system to attack non-vital parts of his own body (veins, bloody vessels, lungs and kidneys - nobody needs them), and after inheriting the flawed genes, my own immune system decides that the insulin-producing beta cells in my pancreas are the enemy.
That leaves me with all of the 'benefits' of Types I and II, effectively. I get all of the fun of calculating and injecting doses of insulin, while none of the weight-loss! Lucky me.
If I could only have been Type II DM. Then I could just take a pill and diet.
"Outs" Battlefield 4? What, are they going to be in rainbow camouflage or something?
I'll answer your statements in order.
;-)
Firstly, yes, I'm sure it does cost tens of millions. I didn't want to risk exaggerating the figures, however. Without access to financial reports, any figure I quote would be akin to pulling a figure out of my arse.
Secondly, some components are designed for specific models, and the first time something is engineered there are no off-the-shelf components. A self-levelling-leg wouldn't be something they could suddenly order, for example. If they decide they want that feature and it hasn't been done before, they design it.
Thirdly, yes, clean room can be done from specifications. It can also be done by having 2 teams; One to reverse-engineer the original and see what makes it tick, then describe it to a second team that has never touched or seen the insides of the original. Compaq's reverse engineering of IBM's BIOS is a perfect example of this scenario.
Fourthly, not my intention at all. Yes, there are original ideas conceived in Korea, I was simply drawing a comparison to a scenario I was familiar with as I was amused that Samsung was being accused of similar. Ultimately Samsung differs in this example in that they produced an item that had superior elements in some areas. The LG example produced an inferior quality that, yes, walked across the floor because it rattled so badly when hitting its 1800rpm spin. (They felt that the counterbalancing in the German product was over engineered and possibly didn't take into consideration that "Average Joe" doesn't ensure their machines are level.)
I note another post from you indicates that the Germans don't see this in an offensive fashion. I guess that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery then, and my feelings are just misplaced loyalty and overcompensation. Because if you weren't correct - if the Germans felt threatened by these tactics - that there'd be a lot of legal proceedings that would result in product bans.
Heh, I'm well aware of that. It sucks for the companies investing in the R&D, but I'm not going to complain as an end-user.
If it wasn't for reverse-engineering and clean-room techniques, I'd not be typing this on a derivative of an IBM Clone that cost mere hundreds of dollars. I'd either be using a hideously expensive IBM, or derivative of some other open design that might have come along instead.
They do, regularly. But where is the incentive?
They spend hundreds of thousands in engineering a new feature, testing it and ensuring it will last long term. A company in a country that doesn't protect IP then buys the German product for, say, $1k and then copies it. Said company's R&D costs are now ~$1k.
Innovation is important, but if a product can be blatantly copied and then sold to undercut the innovator, then why invest to innovate?
It's surely just coincidental that my example and the article are concerning Korean companies, of course.
That's not an uncommon tactic with Korean manufacturers, however.
I once worked on some high-quality, German engineered washing machines. It was discovered that, rather than spend hundreds of thousands on R&D, LG Electronics bought one of these units, disassembled it and copied it feature-for-feature albeit with minor design modifications.
The result? A washer that boasted the same features, yet "walked" across the floor during the spin cycle.
There were no legal breaches by LG in cleanrooming like that. I guess Samsung just pushed the envelope a bit far in the aesthetics department.
What's that? Learned how to spell "congratulations?"
And moving from the "traditionally strong" password to employing XKCD's suggestions, I go from 2.29 Minutes on the "Massive Cracking Array Scenario" to 1.07 million trillion trillion trillion centuries.
I just have to hope that nobody comes around with a $5 wrench...
It worked for Coca Cola with their Mother energy drinks.
"NEW: Tastes nothing like the old one"
http://www.mysavings.com/img/link/large/17969.jpg
Well, actually I find this rather boring and unimpressive.
I can remember the days when every Mhz made a difference and you had to turn off Turbo for some programmes.
Back then, reaching 100Mhz was a huge milestone; But then the GigaHertz wars began.
It was actually interesting to see how well someone overclocked their Celeron 300A or their Athlons. As the Mhz crept up to 500Mhz, 600Mhz, 700Mhz, we were all getting excited, waiting for the day that one of the x86 giants would hit the Holy Grail of 1,000Mhz!
Then Intel threw their hands up in the air and went "Fuck it!" and pushed the P4 bullshit; clock speed became meaningless as the Athlons ran rings around the P4 despite the significantly higher clock speeds of the P4s.
Since then, it's largely a non-event. The architectures are so different that MHz/GHz ratings aren't useful to compare between brands - not like when you could know that an AMD 80486 DX40 was going to be faster than the (more expensive) Intel 80486 DX33. (Anyone remember the disdain and contempt the brands and magazines pushed on the Bus multipliers back then? "Don't buy a 486 DX2 50! It's clock multiplied! Buy a real 486 DX 50 instead!")
So, yeah... Compared to the days where someone would brag about a stable overclock of x MHz more than stock, these e-peen measuring contents for the highest GHz is nothing more than being a total tosser. Show it actually running stably and applications, or I couldn't care less.