ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
Evo 5 RS
They're Samsung's biggest client for microprocessors. Don't s**t on the hand that feeds you. Or for that matter the industry.
Not to mention they make most of the worlds memory. I think the world could survive without Apple, but I'd rather not see Samsung potentially go out of business through a dispute over a poxy phone/tablet ta.
Not to mention they make most of the worlds memory. I think the world could survive without Apple, but I'd rather not see Samsung potentially go out of business through a dispute over a poxy phone/tablet ta.
Last edited:
realnumber 1
ClioSport Club Member
I love how some know better than a jury that's heard all the evidence
Strange how the outcome wasn't quite the same in the South Korean court case
.Either way it's all tit for tat and Samsung, Apple, HTC etc will keep going round in circles suing each other for years to come.
133/225/CLS AMG
One of the guys at work had a copy of the document outlining all of the things that Apple claimed Samnsung had copied.
It was the most pedantic document I have ever seen so I'm not surprised Apple didn't win on all the things they mentioned. That said there are so many innovations Apple have come up with and credit to them, that there will always be similarities to things they came up with first.
That said I'd imagine Apple have only taken this interest because Samsung are genuine competition. A couple of people I work with have jumped at the chance to go from iPhones to the new Samsung phone and I must admit it's impressive. When I look back I had an LG Arena phone that was a complete rip off of the iPhone in many ways but tried to have a few innovative things, it was sh!t and discontinued. It's due to Samsung's genuinely good products that Apple are hitting back.
Reminds me of the old Netscape vs Internet Explorer situation.
It was the most pedantic document I have ever seen so I'm not surprised Apple didn't win on all the things they mentioned. That said there are so many innovations Apple have come up with and credit to them, that there will always be similarities to things they came up with first.
That said I'd imagine Apple have only taken this interest because Samsung are genuine competition. A couple of people I work with have jumped at the chance to go from iPhones to the new Samsung phone and I must admit it's impressive. When I look back I had an LG Arena phone that was a complete rip off of the iPhone in many ways but tried to have a few innovative things, it was sh!t and discontinued. It's due to Samsung's genuinely good products that Apple are hitting back.
Reminds me of the old Netscape vs Internet Explorer situation.
I think the original TouchWiz on the Galaxy was a blatant copy of the iPhones UI to be honest - but I don't understand why Apple have waited till now to get anything done about it. However $1billion is ridiculous for stuff like that.
I am really starting to get pissed off with Apples suing culture, going after all the Android manufacturers is only going to piss off Google more and more. I can't wait for the day that someone wins a stupid patent war against Apple and gets it to sit down in its place - be it Google or anybody else.
Reminds me of that story of Bill Gates going to meet Steve Jobs because Apple were suing Microsoft for using a GUI interface. Steve Jobs is ranting and raving at Bill while he sits there calmly. Once Steve Jobs finally finishes his shouting Bill Gates simply says - "You and I are both like guys who had this rich neighbor - Xerox - who left the door open all the time. And you go sneaking in to steal a TV set. Only when you get there, you realize that I got there first."
I am really starting to get pissed off with Apples suing culture, going after all the Android manufacturers is only going to piss off Google more and more. I can't wait for the day that someone wins a stupid patent war against Apple and gets it to sit down in its place - be it Google or anybody else.
Reminds me of that story of Bill Gates going to meet Steve Jobs because Apple were suing Microsoft for using a GUI interface. Steve Jobs is ranting and raving at Bill while he sits there calmly. Once Steve Jobs finally finishes his shouting Bill Gates simply says - "You and I are both like guys who had this rich neighbor - Xerox - who left the door open all the time. And you go sneaking in to steal a TV set. Only when you get there, you realize that I got there first."
I was going to post but got bored by the Apple fanboys.
realnumber 1
ClioSport Club Member
Sony Ericson P800 is the first modern smart phone that was really popular, that I remember
HTc made loads of phones for Orange too
realnumber 1
ClioSport Club Member
HTC made phones for everyone. Long before anyone had ever heard of them lol. I had loads of there Win Mobile phones before Android came about.
Still got an i-mate SP3 (same as an Orange SPV) somewhere. In hindsight maybe they should've sued Apple for nicking the "i" from them lol....
Still got an i-mate SP3 (same as an Orange SPV) somewhere. In hindsight maybe they should've sued Apple for nicking the "i" from them lol....
realnumber 1
ClioSport Club Member
I'm not sure when i-mate first came about but my comment was more of a joke than anything.
realnumber 1
ClioSport Club Member
It was long before 2006. My SP3 was about 2003 or something...
Infact looking it seems they formed in 2001.
Infact looking it seems they formed in 2001.
The figure is high because they were found guilty of wilfully infringing not one, but many patents. The moment you're guilty of wilful infringement the damages treble.
Apples suing culture? It's no different to any large corporation, the difference being that apple have innovated protected where others have just sought to copy. Apple gave us the slick phone interface, not google, not Samsung, not Nokia, not Motorola....you get the picture.
Regardless of whether you think software patents are wrong (my own personal point of view is that they're a load of b****cks) apple have a right to defend their investment. You'd have I be deaf, dumb and blind to believe that Samsung did anything other than Carbon copy the iPhone, their own lawyers couldn't even tell the difference and their internal documentation was on how to take their own s**t ui and turn it into a carbon copy. Even google warned then that they were infringing on apples ip.
Google cant do s**t, apart from the odd patent most of the patents they've acquired are standards essential (hello moto) and therefore they have to sub license them to apple in a non discriminatory way, i.e they can't hold apple to ransom. On the other hand, apple own patents to interface methods that people have become accustomed to.
It might be s**t, but at least Microsoft have attempted to innovate and differentiate with their mobile phone platform.
My 2 pence.
Tom
ClioSport Club Member
EV (s)
Microsoft have played the smart game. Quietly licensing both their own patents and other peoples. While all the while earning a shitload from android sales.
I'd be surprised if windows 8 (both phone and desktop variants) didn't end up being a properly competitive OS. Android/iOS litigation could end up being an unwelcome distraction and consumers moving towards a device that wont have features removed because they infringe something.
Buying Nokia is next. Slowly wind it down and sit on the IP.
I'd be surprised if windows 8 (both phone and desktop variants) didn't end up being a properly competitive OS. Android/iOS litigation could end up being an unwelcome distraction and consumers moving towards a device that wont have features removed because they infringe something.
Buying Nokia is next. Slowly wind it down and sit on the IP.
Clart
ClioSport Club Member
Im no apple fan boy, but i do like their products. Not quite sure how u can patent something like tap or press to zoom in. How else are u supposed to do stuff on a touch screen phone? Also theres no denying that the iphone Was a game changer, but im not sure how else u could design a phone around a rectangular touch screen, they are all going to look pretty similar.
Kind of the point. Anyone that makes a touchcreen phone gets apple in their face saying f**k you pay me, because they own the ip
Not as if they invented icons on a desktop though is it, it's just the fact Microsoft weren't petty enough to patent it!
I can see where both sides come from, but I think some of the patents that get accepted are absolutely ridiculous.
And pretty much your last point summed it up!
realnumber 1
ClioSport Club Member
I wouldn't say they invented much. More improved something.
All the more poignant when you consider that people now consider this stuff as standard. Like it was always obvious. Apple made it happen, and IMO they have a moral and legal right to protect their innovations.
Patents only have a grant period of 20 years.
If somebody came out with a unique way of operating a microwave they could rightfully patent it and protect it.
Patent damages are high in this case because of the sheer number of devices involved and because it was willful infringement, had they not willfully infringed the damages would have been a third of what they were.
As Roy said things are only obvious after somebody else has invented the method, you know like it seems obvious that a ball is the best way of providing a pivot for a vacuum cleaner, but dyson got there first.
Software patents are dumb, but while they exist you can't just go around copying stuff and expect there to be no repucussions, espcially in a case like this where the smoking gun comes in the form of a document from inside your own company on how to copy your competitors product.
mk2 182
I love all this when people say "apple fan boys". The fact that you get slated for owning what I class as the better product within that category ie iPhone, iMac, iPad. Don't get me wrong about 20% of the price is for the name "apple". You get great design for that tho not just good products.
Once the iPhone 5 had been release we will see how well apple do. That was the last product that jobs had an influence on.
As for the 1 billion. Like some one has said it's not the money that matters it's trying to get market share. Apple know that "Samesung" galaxy s3 is a very clever phone so they need to suppress the sale of it till the release the 5.
My own opinion.
Once the iPhone 5 had been release we will see how well apple do. That was the last product that jobs had an influence on.
As for the 1 billion. Like some one has said it's not the money that matters it's trying to get market share. Apple know that "Samesung" galaxy s3 is a very clever phone so they need to suppress the sale of it till the release the 5.
My own opinion.
Market share counts for s**t when apple make more profit on mobile phones than the rest of the industry combined, its not a metric that Apple give two hoots about otherwise we'd have had the iPhone nano already.
Apple will continue to sell more and more mobile phones, I doubt they're particularly bothered how many phones Samsung or anybody else sells because in terms of revenue, none of them are competitors.
The iPhone not a good product? See first paragraph.
That said, iOS6 is the poorest release to date and android is catching up in the slickness race, this coupled with the fact that Google are trying to get stock android devices to be the mainstream may well give apple something to think about at least in the operating system department.
I've known the guy who was the iPhone hardware manager for the first 4 iphones since I was 14. During that entire period of development he had precisely 1 meeting with Steve jobs about the project.....but a whole load more with industrial design.
Evo 5 RS
I'm an Apple, and everything ever created was my idea. Apparently, maybe.
Anyone backing Apple in 90% of their patents in here needs to do their homework. Like actually.
Anyone backing Apple in 90% of their patents in here needs to do their homework. Like actually.
Clio 172
I don't blame the other companies for copying apple, Apple were making a lot of profit, and maybe selling more phones than an individual phone company ? (I don't know, someone did mention it but can't remember what the numbers where!) so other people are bound to try and copy.
Personally, Apple > all. Before people scream fan boy, I can justify it. It's things like Siri, iMessage, okay they was a copy of someone else's idea, but it wasnt a copy, it was a huge improvement on it. For example, I love how immessage is implemented into the message client, how easy it is for group messages. Anyone can pick up an iPhone, and just use it, it's simple, and you know exactly what you are doing, with no problem.
Iv used android phones, I couldn't get on with them. The layout is confusing, things are in silly places, they keyboard is rubbish (all IMO of course). Of course, Iv never used them as long as Iv used an iPhone, but it was simple things, like i didn't really find the settings menu easy to flick through
And people say "I can't see no other way to do it", that's because no one else has tried a way to do it. Unfortunately, i don't think anyone is in a position to try something new, from where I see it, competition is stiff, and no one can afford to create something that's a flop, so everyone is creating the same idea, as it works, but may not be the best idea.
Fair play to Apple, but I can probably see a tit for tat war starting now, where people will be treading to carefully, not trying groundbreaking stuff
Personally, Apple > all. Before people scream fan boy, I can justify it. It's things like Siri, iMessage, okay they was a copy of someone else's idea, but it wasnt a copy, it was a huge improvement on it. For example, I love how immessage is implemented into the message client, how easy it is for group messages. Anyone can pick up an iPhone, and just use it, it's simple, and you know exactly what you are doing, with no problem.
Iv used android phones, I couldn't get on with them. The layout is confusing, things are in silly places, they keyboard is rubbish (all IMO of course). Of course, Iv never used them as long as Iv used an iPhone, but it was simple things, like i didn't really find the settings menu easy to flick through
And people say "I can't see no other way to do it", that's because no one else has tried a way to do it. Unfortunately, i don't think anyone is in a position to try something new, from where I see it, competition is stiff, and no one can afford to create something that's a flop, so everyone is creating the same idea, as it works, but may not be the best idea.
Fair play to Apple, but I can probably see a tit for tat war starting now, where people will be treading to carefully, not trying groundbreaking stuff
Tom
ClioSport Club Member
EV (s)
You aren't really getting this are you?
If patents are granted then most of the time they are defendable.
This case wasn't just about patents, it's about hardware and software aimed to mimic iOs devices. That's just plain lazy.
Clio 172
Yeah, Siri was a great Apple development
Didn't say it was, wasn't it Nokia that made it? I'm just saying I like how it's integrated into the phone, and from what Iv seen about ios6, it only improves it.
Enlighten us then on why you believe that 90% of their patents are not valid in your opinion.
You do realize that once a patent has been enforced in court that it then becomes very strong? Samsung and their laughable legal team have just done apple a massive favour.
Like Tom said, the main issue here was Samsung blatantly copying the look and feel, it just so happened that they infringed on a whole load of patents at the same time.
Software patents are dumb but Samsung are clearly dumber.
