And iOS is still ahead of Android in marketshare when you include all iOS devices - yet another vector you refuse to consider but is indicative of anything but Apple being stagnant.
Sorry, the facts say you're wrong. StatCounter includes ALL mobile devices, including tablets and iTouch devices - anything that is mobile. Android has passed iOS in marketshare and is second only to Symbian - which hasn't lost any marketshare.
Overall, Android is gaining at the expense of Apple and RIM - both are losing marketshare, everyone else is pretty flat (or tiny changes) except Android - which is skyrocketing. iOS is now in 3rd place, and could very well fall to 4th - especially if Nokia makes a big push in their historically-dominated markets with Windows Phone.
Apple can compete against one or many companies, but that few other single companies are capable of really competing against Apple
Except Samsung. In fact, Samsung has probably already passed Apple in terms of smartphone sales. They were very close back at the end of June, and at the sales growth rate of Samsung and Apple over the April-June 2011 timeframe, Samsung should pass Apple sometime around the first half of September - now. And HTC wasn't too far behind, with its sales growth rate putting it ahead of Apple sometime next year. No surprise that Apple is predominantly attacking Samsung and HTC - the two who have passed, or are threatening to pass, Apple in terms of number of units sold and marketshare.
All they are asking is Samsung to stop making devices that look EXACTLY like the equivalent Apple devices. And they appear to have enough of a case that a few courts agree, which means your assertion has been tested and failed in a court of law.
That's ONE court, that didn't hear Samsung's argument, and already greatly scaled back the scope of its INITIAL injunction. The other EU court - the Netherlands - pretty much slapped down Apple, hard. Samsung will face no real problem from that and will get to cheerfully continue sales in the rest of the EU - outside of Germany (which will probably end up following the lead of the Netherlands).
The Dutch court decided that Samsung didn't infringe on any "look" and that, in fact, the Apple CD was so vague as to be unenforceable. Additionally, the whole "slide to lock" thing was found to have prior art (thus tossing Apple's patent) - and we already have precedent in courts about the LG Prada being prior art for the physical look that Apple is trying to cement.
Also regarding that physical look, consider the Samsung media viewer from early 2006. Predates the iPhone and the iPad - and looks an awful lot like the iPad copied its styling cues...
The other reality is that very soon Windows Mobile 7 is going to start eating up Android marketshare.
EVERY analyst in this field has said that Android will emerge on top, marketshare wise, and that Windows Phone will probably end up in second place, with iOS battling for 3rd with Blackberry. That doesn't sound like Windows Phone 7 (get the name right) will eat up Android so much as it will eat up iOS.
...in world population mean for humanity and for the the planet?
It means we're all fucked.
No, it does not. It means that some of us fucked, but basement dwellers most certainly were not fucked nor ever had the opportunity to be fucked, and thus feel fucking left out.
Thanks for confirming you have zero reading comprehension skills. Read my post above again, and pay attention to the timeline in the example. Now consider the industrial design used by Samsung back in 2006. Sorry, fanboy, but this case is really without merit.
And that's one reason why Apple didn't sue the JooJoo. So what's Samsung's excuse - that they actually copied the JooJoo, not the iPad? After the CD was enforcable?
No, the CD is no longer enforceable against Samsung - because they started using that design before it was enforceable.
Here's an example. You are a nationwide restaurant called Fanboy Foods. You have a new slogan "Cheap Good Eats". You register that trademark - and it's accepted and granted.
A year later, my little store, Rooster's Grub, starts using the same slogan - "Cheap Good Eats".
A year after that you, Fanboy Foods, starts using your registered slogan. Guess what - I can still use the slogan since I was using it in trade before you were - I still have precedent to use it - even though you registered it before my first use. You didn't use the slogan in commerce, and thus you have no priority against my use.
You can stop and legally prohibit anyone else in the entire US (or in the case of the Apple/Samsung spat, the EU) from using that slogan - and even collect damages against them. But since I was using it before you were using it, you cannot restrict my use now or in the future.
Same thing with community designs - you can only enforce against people who begin using it AFTER you registered AND used the design in commerce. Doing one or the other does not preclude others from using that same design - you need to do both to have the legal right to prohibit use. Which is why Samsung actually has priority in use of the design - not in registration, but in use. So they're fine from a design standpoint.
There must be some reason why Samsung decides not to fight back much harder, the initial arguments is on their side. There is a secret agenda or clue somewhere. For now, I have no idea.
My guess is that Samsung will use their manufacturing clout to strike back. Wait until a critical time in the iPad 3/iPhone 5 production cycle and then stop delivering parts. Sure, Samsung will "lose" $6 billion in revenue, and $500 million in profit - but for Apple, it will be catastrophic. Fully 70% of their revenue and profit come from the iPhone and iPad. Having those two product lines stalled for 90-120 days would cripple Apple.
Stop delivering parts to Apple, and tell Apple they can either back off their insane lawsuits or can go buy parts elsewhere - and see their market and share price destroyed. For Samsung, it would be a minor burp in their revenue and profit - for Apple, it would be a complete destruction.
Actually, it's based on reality. The trends are unmistakable. Over the last year, iOS is down about 25% in terms of marketshare, and Android is up just a little over 200%. And Android now has a larger marketshare than iOS, and is quickly gaining on the leader, Symbian.
I just find it sickening I think the only reason it's Samsung being targeted and not the others is that they were the first to make devices both thinner more powerful and with better screens than anything Apple has brought to the table.
Dont' forget, too, that Samsung is about to (or maybe already has) dethrone Apple as the "Smart Phone king"... They were very close back at the end of June, and based upon growth for Apple and Samsung in the first 6 months of the year, Samsung is probably already selling more smartphones than Apple.
Samsung is beating Apple in the market that Apple's claimed they own - and Apple has nothing left to stave off the ascent of Samsung except to try to find some legal blocks somewhere in the world to slow them down.
HTC, coincidentally, is just behind Samsung, and within a few quarters of equaling Apple as well. It's no coincidence that HTC is also being heavily sued by Apple... Apple knows who's beating them, and rather than innovating and improving their products is trying to toss out roadblocks. Probably because Apple is out of ideas. The slavish devotion to "there can be only ONE version of any product solution" is now hamstringing them.
But all they have to do is try one in the store to realize it is not true. We all see more tab ads on tv then iPad ads. We all have more opportunity to use one in the store. Their sales are still pitiful.
Pitiful? They're 40% of the market, whittling the iPad down from 94% to 61%, in just 1 year. Sales are actually quite good, if you step outside the Reality Distortion Field...
Engadget and Slashdot might be a LITTLE bit biased towards geeks who would probably buy a Galaxy Tab over an iPad anyway.
I really doubt most of Apple's target market cares.
Not even close! Consider the recent review on Engadget for the Philips GoGear 3 media player. It's a solid product - and so, to have SOMETHING to complain about, Engadget complains about buttons on the bottom, that occupy 25% of the front of the device. Yet you never, ever hear a peep from Engadget about the fact the iPhone's screen is just 65% of the front of the device - smaller than the Philips unit they chide for not having enough screen.
Engadget is about as pro-Apple a site as you can get...
Really? So far, it's been Germany... And that was with a hearing in which Samsung was not present. The Netherlands tossed it, and it's under review in other places - but no one, other than a 2 bit, backwater Court in Germany has issued an injunction.
Because Apple registered the design in Europe in the mid-90s.... Nice try though. Why don't you try and look up things relevant to this case instead of irrelevant distractions.
Ummm, no. The design was registered in 2004. HOWEVER, much like registered trademarks, registered designs are not considered live until you start using them - go ahead and register your design or trademark, but until you start using them in commerce they are considered inactive. And if someone else starts using the mark or design prior to your use, then they get to keep using the mark or design thereafter.
Thus the reason Samsung's 2006 media viewer is considered prior art for Samsung's own tablets, as it provides a design language for Samsung to use.
Apple may have registered the design in 2004, but because they did not start using it until 2009, it wasn't actually active and any company that started using the same design prior to 2009 can continue to use that same design without concern.
An oft-overlooked - but crucial - point of CD filings: you must have your design registered AND start using it for it to be considered 'active'. Just like registered trademarks in the US - they are not considered live and enforceable until you start using them in commerce.
Was Apple using that design back in 2004? No? When did they start using that design in commerce? Until that date - the design was registered but not enforceable. And like trademarks, others who use your registered design before you start using it are indemnified from infringement issues (it's why you often have small local mom-and-pop stores using "registered names/trademarks" without problem - they were using them before the larger entity registered and/or used the mark).
Yes, you can obviously make a tablet without fear getting sued by Apple - but Samsung decided they'd rather copy the design.
Can you perhaps explain, then, why the iPad looks suspiciously like a Samsung media player from 2006, down to the aspect ratio and rounded corners? If anything, it seems that the iPad took inspiration from Samsung's design, and that the Galaxy Tab is simply continuing Samsung's internal design language.
Too bad the LG Prada pre-existed the iPhone, and Samsung already had an iPad-looking product on the market in 2006. Seems Apple was late to the "looks party" - behind LG and Samsung.
Wear the "troll" label as a badge of honor - it means you really caught a lot of fanboys in a position where they have no answer, other than just label "TROLL!"
No, Apple wants to stop companies building tablets that look very much the same as an iPad.
If only the iPad didn't look so much like prior Samsung products from 2006... Apple clearly stole the idea from Samsung; Samsung's just building on their prior design language.
Floating houses are old hat... Being from Seattle, WA I hear that damned "so do you live in a houseboat like that movie, Sleepless in Seattle" all the time. And for the record, I don't - there's really no flat land in Seattle, it's all hills with lakes and rivers.
When an average is constructed from combining many measurements it's reasonable to use a higher precision than the original measurements. That allows you to detect subtle changes in the data. For example if you have a series 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56 the average is 52.67 but if the series is 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56 the average is 52.83. Both round to 53 but expressing them to 2 decimal places shows there is a difference between the two series. Statistically speaking that technique is validly used all of the time.
Actually, no. The precision of your final average needs to be based upon the precision of the input values. Your average as listed above would be 52.67 +/- 1.0; if that was to track a change in temperature from 52.55 to 532.67, then difference - 0.12 - is well within the precision of your measurement. It is failure to include the precision that often leads to erroneous claims and results. Is the difference because of actual environmental changes, or from imprecise measurements? You cannot say because the assumed change is less than what you can measure.
Showing basic English mastery is now a requirement in China to graduate from high school. The country as a whole is making English mastery a major goal.
That doesn't alter the fact presented in the HSBC bank ad; there are 5 times as many people learning English today in China than live in England. BTW, HSBC stands for Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Company - it might have been their Bangkok branch, but they're an old English bank based on Hong Kong and Shanghai - both well located within China.
Slashdot Mirror
And iOS is still ahead of Android in marketshare when you include all iOS devices - yet another vector you refuse to consider but is indicative of anything but Apple being stagnant.
Sorry, the facts say you're wrong. StatCounter includes ALL mobile devices, including tablets and iTouch devices - anything that is mobile. Android has passed iOS in marketshare and is second only to Symbian - which hasn't lost any marketshare.
Overall, Android is gaining at the expense of Apple and RIM - both are losing marketshare, everyone else is pretty flat (or tiny changes) except Android - which is skyrocketing. iOS is now in 3rd place, and could very well fall to 4th - especially if Nokia makes a big push in their historically-dominated markets with Windows Phone.
Apple can compete against one or many companies, but that few other single companies are capable of really competing against Apple
Except Samsung. In fact, Samsung has probably already passed Apple in terms of smartphone sales. They were very close back at the end of June, and at the sales growth rate of Samsung and Apple over the April-June 2011 timeframe, Samsung should pass Apple sometime around the first half of September - now. And HTC wasn't too far behind, with its sales growth rate putting it ahead of Apple sometime next year. No surprise that Apple is predominantly attacking Samsung and HTC - the two who have passed, or are threatening to pass, Apple in terms of number of units sold and marketshare.
All they are asking is Samsung to stop making devices that look EXACTLY like the equivalent Apple devices. And they appear to have enough of a case that a few courts agree, which means your assertion has been tested and failed in a court of law.
That's ONE court, that didn't hear Samsung's argument, and already greatly scaled back the scope of its INITIAL injunction. The other EU court - the Netherlands - pretty much slapped down Apple, hard. Samsung will face no real problem from that and will get to cheerfully continue sales in the rest of the EU - outside of Germany (which will probably end up following the lead of the Netherlands).
The Dutch court decided that Samsung didn't infringe on any "look" and that, in fact, the Apple CD was so vague as to be unenforceable. Additionally, the whole "slide to lock" thing was found to have prior art (thus tossing Apple's patent) - and we already have precedent in courts about the LG Prada being prior art for the physical look that Apple is trying to cement.
Also regarding that physical look, consider the Samsung media viewer from early 2006. Predates the iPhone and the iPad - and looks an awful lot like the iPad copied its styling cues...
The other reality is that very soon Windows Mobile 7 is going to start eating up Android marketshare.
EVERY analyst in this field has said that Android will emerge on top, marketshare wise, and that Windows Phone will probably end up in second place, with iOS battling for 3rd with Blackberry. That doesn't sound like Windows Phone 7 (get the name right) will eat up Android so much as it will eat up iOS.
Google is your friend.
...in world population mean for humanity and for the the planet?
It means we're all fucked.
No, it does not. It means that some of us fucked, but basement dwellers most certainly were not fucked nor ever had the opportunity to be fucked, and thus feel fucking left out.
Of, if you attack us with bogus patents in multiple jurisdictions - we'll stop selling parts to you until the situation is resolved...
Thanks for confirming you have zero reading comprehension skills. Read my post above again, and pay attention to the timeline in the example. Now consider the industrial design used by Samsung back in 2006. Sorry, fanboy, but this case is really without merit.
And that's one reason why Apple didn't sue the JooJoo. So what's Samsung's excuse - that they actually copied the JooJoo, not the iPad? After the CD was enforcable?
No, the CD is no longer enforceable against Samsung - because they started using that design before it was enforceable.
Here's an example. You are a nationwide restaurant called Fanboy Foods. You have a new slogan "Cheap Good Eats". You register that trademark - and it's accepted and granted.
A year later, my little store, Rooster's Grub, starts using the same slogan - "Cheap Good Eats".
A year after that you, Fanboy Foods, starts using your registered slogan. Guess what - I can still use the slogan since I was using it in trade before you were - I still have precedent to use it - even though you registered it before my first use. You didn't use the slogan in commerce, and thus you have no priority against my use.
You can stop and legally prohibit anyone else in the entire US (or in the case of the Apple/Samsung spat, the EU) from using that slogan - and even collect damages against them. But since I was using it before you were using it, you cannot restrict my use now or in the future.
Same thing with community designs - you can only enforce against people who begin using it AFTER you registered AND used the design in commerce. Doing one or the other does not preclude others from using that same design - you need to do both to have the legal right to prohibit use. Which is why Samsung actually has priority in use of the design - not in registration, but in use. So they're fine from a design standpoint.
There must be some reason why Samsung decides not to fight back much harder, the initial arguments is on their side. There is a secret agenda or clue somewhere. For now, I have no idea.
My guess is that Samsung will use their manufacturing clout to strike back. Wait until a critical time in the iPad 3/iPhone 5 production cycle and then stop delivering parts. Sure, Samsung will "lose" $6 billion in revenue, and $500 million in profit - but for Apple, it will be catastrophic. Fully 70% of their revenue and profit come from the iPhone and iPad. Having those two product lines stalled for 90-120 days would cripple Apple.
Stop delivering parts to Apple, and tell Apple they can either back off their insane lawsuits or can go buy parts elsewhere - and see their market and share price destroyed. For Samsung, it would be a minor burp in their revenue and profit - for Apple, it would be a complete destruction.
Actually, it's based on reality. The trends are unmistakable. Over the last year, iOS is down about 25% in terms of marketshare, and Android is up just a little over 200%. And Android now has a larger marketshare than iOS, and is quickly gaining on the leader, Symbian.
I just find it sickening I think the only reason it's Samsung being targeted and not the others is that they were the first to make devices both thinner more powerful and with better screens than anything Apple has brought to the table.
Dont' forget, too, that Samsung is about to (or maybe already has) dethrone Apple as the "Smart Phone king"... They were very close back at the end of June, and based upon growth for Apple and Samsung in the first 6 months of the year, Samsung is probably already selling more smartphones than Apple.
Samsung is beating Apple in the market that Apple's claimed they own - and Apple has nothing left to stave off the ascent of Samsung except to try to find some legal blocks somewhere in the world to slow them down.
HTC, coincidentally, is just behind Samsung, and within a few quarters of equaling Apple as well. It's no coincidence that HTC is also being heavily sued by Apple... Apple knows who's beating them, and rather than innovating and improving their products is trying to toss out roadblocks. Probably because Apple is out of ideas. The slavish devotion to "there can be only ONE version of any product solution" is now hamstringing them.
But all they have to do is try one in the store to realize it is not true. We all see more tab ads on tv then iPad ads. We all have more opportunity to use one in the store. Their sales are still pitiful.
Pitiful? They're 40% of the market, whittling the iPad down from 94% to 61%, in just 1 year. Sales are actually quite good, if you step outside the Reality Distortion Field...
Engadget and Slashdot might be a LITTLE bit biased towards geeks who would probably buy a Galaxy Tab over an iPad anyway.
I really doubt most of Apple's target market cares.
Not even close! Consider the recent review on Engadget for the Philips GoGear 3 media player. It's a solid product - and so, to have SOMETHING to complain about, Engadget complains about buttons on the bottom, that occupy 25% of the front of the device. Yet you never, ever hear a peep from Engadget about the fact the iPhone's screen is just 65% of the front of the device - smaller than the Philips unit they chide for not having enough screen.
Engadget is about as pro-Apple a site as you can get...
Really? So far, it's been Germany... And that was with a hearing in which Samsung was not present. The Netherlands tossed it, and it's under review in other places - but no one, other than a 2 bit, backwater Court in Germany has issued an injunction.
Because Apple registered the design in Europe in the mid-90s.... Nice try though. Why don't you try and look up things relevant to this case instead of irrelevant distractions.
Ummm, no. The design was registered in 2004. HOWEVER, much like registered trademarks, registered designs are not considered live until you start using them - go ahead and register your design or trademark, but until you start using them in commerce they are considered inactive. And if someone else starts using the mark or design prior to your use, then they get to keep using the mark or design thereafter.
Thus the reason Samsung's 2006 media viewer is considered prior art for Samsung's own tablets, as it provides a design language for Samsung to use.
Apple may have registered the design in 2004, but because they did not start using it until 2009, it wasn't actually active and any company that started using the same design prior to 2009 can continue to use that same design without concern.
Well played, good sir! Sarcasm is so oft-overlooked...
The suit in Germany is based on the European Community-Design 000181607-0001 - filed in May 2004
Any "prior art" prior to 2004 please.
An oft-overlooked - but crucial - point of CD filings: you must have your design registered AND start using it for it to be considered 'active'. Just like registered trademarks in the US - they are not considered live and enforceable until you start using them in commerce.
Was Apple using that design back in 2004? No? When did they start using that design in commerce? Until that date - the design was registered but not enforceable. And like trademarks, others who use your registered design before you start using it are indemnified from infringement issues (it's why you often have small local mom-and-pop stores using "registered names/trademarks" without problem - they were using them before the larger entity registered and/or used the mark).
Samsung was using that design back in 2006, well before the iPhone existed or the iPad was even announced.
Yes, you can obviously make a tablet without fear getting sued by Apple - but Samsung decided they'd rather copy the design.
Can you perhaps explain, then, why the iPad looks suspiciously like a Samsung media player from 2006, down to the aspect ratio and rounded corners? If anything, it seems that the iPad took inspiration from Samsung's design, and that the Galaxy Tab is simply continuing Samsung's internal design language.
Too bad the LG Prada pre-existed the iPhone, and Samsung already had an iPad-looking product on the market in 2006. Seems Apple was late to the "looks party" - behind LG and Samsung.
Wear the "troll" label as a badge of honor - it means you really caught a lot of fanboys in a position where they have no answer, other than just label "TROLL!"
No, Apple wants to stop companies building tablets that look very much the same as an iPad.
If only the iPad didn't look so much like prior Samsung products from 2006... Apple clearly stole the idea from Samsung; Samsung's just building on their prior design language.
WOOSH.
Floating houses are old hat... Being from Seattle, WA I hear that damned "so do you live in a houseboat like that movie, Sleepless in Seattle" all the time. And for the record, I don't - there's really no flat land in Seattle, it's all hills with lakes and rivers.
It's "I, Robot" from Isaac Asimov. How many read that book early on and thought "I can do better than those three rules"...
When an average is constructed from combining many measurements it's reasonable to use a higher precision than the original measurements. That allows you to detect subtle changes in the data. For example if you have a series 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56 the average is 52.67 but if the series is 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56 the average is 52.83. Both round to 53 but expressing them to 2 decimal places shows there is a difference between the two series. Statistically speaking that technique is validly used all of the time.
Actually, no. The precision of your final average needs to be based upon the precision of the input values. Your average as listed above would be 52.67 +/- 1.0; if that was to track a change in temperature from 52.55 to 532.67, then difference - 0.12 - is well within the precision of your measurement. It is failure to include the precision that often leads to erroneous claims and results. Is the difference because of actual environmental changes, or from imprecise measurements? You cannot say because the assumed change is less than what you can measure.
Showing basic English mastery is now a requirement in China to graduate from high school. The country as a whole is making English mastery a major goal.
That doesn't alter the fact presented in the HSBC bank ad; there are 5 times as many people learning English today in China than live in England. BTW, HSBC stands for Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Company - it might have been their Bangkok branch, but they're an old English bank based on Hong Kong and Shanghai - both well located within China.