Print 124 comment(s) - last by nafhan.. on Aug 27 at 4:41 PM

Want to guess which company is breaking out the champagne tonight?

The jury reached a verdict today and they found Samsung guilty on multiple counts of infringing upon Apple design and software patents. While Apple was able to hold Samsung's feet to the fire on the majority of its utility patents, Samsung received no love from the jurors on its countersuit claims.
The jury ordered Samsung to pay Apple $1,051,855,000 USD ($1.05B USD) in damages. Apple owes Samsung absolutely nothing.

Apple CEO Tim Cook [Image Source: Paul Sakuma, Associated Press]

Not surprisingly, both Apple and Samsung have issued statements to the New York Times regarding the decision. First up, Apple:
We are grateful to the jury for their service and for investing the time to listen to our story and we were thrilled to be able to finally tell it. The mountain of evidence presented during the trail showed that Samsung’s copying went far deeper than even we knew. The lawsuits between Apple and Samsung were about much more than patents or money. They were about values. At Apple, we value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth. We make these products to delight our customers, not for our competitors to flagrantly copy. We applaud the court for finding Samsung’s behavior willful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn’t right.
And now we have Samsung, which is clearly not pleased with the outcome of this case:
Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer.
And even though Microsoft had absolutely nothing to do with this trial (Microsoft can safely sit on the sidelines as a spectator), Bill Cox, senior director of Marketing Communications for Windows Phone, added his two cents in on the decision:

Considering Microsoft’s current position in the smartphone marketplace, we’re not quite sure it's “winning” in this case.

Updated 8/25/2012 @ 2:53am EST
9to5Mac has received an internal memo sent to Apple employees by Apple CEO Tim Cook. In the memo, which features similar wording to the statement issued by Apple after the ruling, Cook describes how taking Samsung to court wasn't about the "patents or money":

Today was an important day for Apple and for innovators everywhere.
Many of you have been closely following the trial against Samsung in San Jose for the past few weeks. We chose legal action very reluctantly and only after repeatedly asking Samsung to stop copying our work. For us this lawsuit has always been about something much more important than patents or money. It’s about values. We value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth. And we do this to delight our customers, not for competitors to flagrantly copy.
We owe a debt of gratitude to the jury who invested their time in listening to our story. We were thrilled to finally have the opportunity to tell it. The mountain of evidence presented during the trial showed that Samsung’s copying went far deeper than we knew.
The jury has now spoken. We applaud them for finding Samsung’s behavior willful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn’t right.
I am very proud of the work that each of you do.
Today, values have won and I hope the whole world listens.

Sources: The New York Times, Twitter

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By GulWestfale on 8/24/12, Rating: 0
RE: well
By TSS on 8/24/2012 9:42:57 PM , Rating: 5
Heh, well since the other news message of the guy having to pay $675,000 for downloading 30 songs, i wouldn't be so sure this case might still end up well.

Whatever way you spin it this is not a good day for the US justice system. Or the consumer.

RE: well
By Solandri on 8/25/2012 1:44:13 AM , Rating: 5
The problem is that too few people know about jury nullification. The judge instructs them to rule based on the letter of the law. That's what they did in the Tenenbaum case (with the $675k award). They don't know that if they feel the law is unjust or plain wrong, they can toss it and rule however they like. That's the next-to-last line of defense in the American legal system (last being the 2nd Amendment), but too few jurors know about it.

Whatever way you spin it this is not a good day for the US justice system. Or the consumer.

Obviously I got into the wrong career. Instead of an engineer, I should've become a patent attorney. I have several software and hardware ideas I'd like to develop into a product. There's nothing like them on the market right now, and I'm pretty confident they'd do well in their respective markets. But right now I am absolutely scared to death of being sued for infringing on some vague or obvious patent for what seems to be some fairly obvious ideas (application of already-existing technologies in one market into a different market). Even if you win, you lose because you have to pay your lawyer. I don't have enough cash reserves to fight a small business-threatening patent suit, and the last thing I want to do at my age is to get financially wiped out and have to start over.

RE: well
By Totally on 8/25/2012 2:28:24 AM , Rating: 2
Can't you simply have the guy who took you to court pay for your lawyer fees if you win the case.

RE: well
By Brazos on 8/25/2012 11:06:56 AM , Rating: 2
If you get called for jury selection and you don't want to be on it (personally, I love it)ask a question about jury nullification. They'll pass right over you.

RE: well
By ExarKun333 on 8/25/2012 12:54:16 PM , Rating: 1
Thats why they created corporations. Create your own and assign the patents. You are then not personally responsible.

RE: well
By xytc on 8/27/2012 6:26:25 AM , Rating: 4
Companies like Samsung, HTC, LG, Sony, Nokia and Motorola are in telecommunication business and some of them producing mobile phones since 1981.
From 1981 till 2007 all these companies have produced hundreds of mobile phones models and have sold billions of units worldwide before Apple was ever thinking of producing a mobile phone in 2007.
In contrast Apple was not a telecommunication company like the others and had zero history or research & development put in the field of developing mobile phones.
So in 2007 Apple just copied all the technology they could have found in all other mobile phones, smartphones and smart devices, and with all that stolen knowledge and technology they have created the iPhone.
Obviously they couldn't have been innovative in any way with their first mobile phone since all the technology was stolen from others, Apple's iPhone was nothing but a copycat.
If you wanna see what models of mobile phones, smartphones or smart devices did Apple just copied with their iPhone just check the following list of models that were produced way before the year 2007 when the first iPhone was released:
- remember the Compaq iPaq models released since year 2000 upwards
- then the old HP iPaq models released since year 2004 upwards, running on Windows Mobile featuring touchscreen displays with hand write recognition models: HP iPAQ h6320, HP iPAQ h6325, HP iPAQ rw6818, HP iPAQ rw6815, HP iPAQ rw6828
- Motorola models released since year 2004: Motorola A1000, Motorola A1010, Motorola ROKR E6, all smartphones with big touchscreen displays
- many HTC models based on Windows Mobile started from year 2002 upwards, including the first Windows Mobile phone released to marked, here are some model examples since year 2006: HTC P3300, HTC TyTN, HTC P3600 they are all smartphones with big touchscreen displays and hand write recognition
- in 2004 Samsung released a Windows Mobile phone model Samsung i700, again a smartphone with big touchscreen display
- Nokia Comunicator series released since 1998 models: Nokia 9000 Communicator, Nokia 9210i Communicator, Nokia 7710 touchscreen display, Nokia N95 they are all smartphones with big displays
- model from year 2006: LG KE850 Prada again with big touchscreen display
- model from year 2006: Philips S900
- models released since 2002 from Dell Axim X5 family:
Dell Axim X5
Dell Axim x50v
Dell Axim X30
- more models released since year 2002 upwards:
HP iPAQ hx4700
HP iPAQ rx3700
- all these smartphone models were made by HTC:
O2 XDA II mini
O2 XDA mini S
O2 XDA Neo
O2 XDA Exec
O2 XDA mini S
O2 XDA Trion
O2 XDA Orbit
Qtek S100
Qtek S110
Qtek 2020i
Qtek S200
Qtek 9000
Qtek 9090
Qtek 9100
Qtek 2020
Qtek 9600
Dopod 686
Dopod 818
Dopod 828
Dopod 818 Pro
Dopod 838
Dopod 838 Pro
Dopod D810/CHT 9100
Dopod D600
Dopod P860
i-mate JAM
i-mate JAMin
i-mate JASJAM
i-mate PDA2k
i-mate PDA2
i-mate K-JAM
i-mate Pocket PC
released in year 2004:
Orange SPV M500
T-Mobile MDA Compact
- released in year 2005:
Vodafone VPA Compact
Orange SPV M600
T-Mobile MDA Compact II
- released in year 2006:
Vodafone VPA Compact GPS
Orange SPV M650
Orange SPV M700
Orange SPV M3100
T-Mobile MDA Compact III
T-Mobile Wing
Cingular 8525

For the ignorants just check the above mentioned models to see how much iPhone resembles them in look and functionality.

Guys just keep in mind that there are many Apple employes which post pro Apple comments on sites like these trying to deceive people like you, they are among the biggest deceivers.
If you wanna know who is the biggest deceiver just read the Bible and you'll find that Satan is.
Ironically this doesn't seem to be the first time when Satan is using an Apple trying to deceive humanity.

RE: well
By Dr of crap on 8/27/2012 8:32:29 AM , Rating: 4
You had a good arguement going until you brought satan into the mix.
Now you look like some kind of wack job!

Tin hat? Voices in your head?? Anxoius?

RE: well
By Mitch101 on 8/24/2012 10:14:43 PM , Rating: 3
Im convinced they need to investigate the Judges in these cases to ensure they have no way of financial gain in these matters.

RE: well
By W00dmann on 8/25/12, Rating: -1
RE: well
By Cheesew1z69 on 8/25/2012 5:33:30 PM , Rating: 2
Another Appletard speaks....

RE: well
By Mitch101 on 8/26/2012 4:34:24 PM , Rating: 2
Not a fan of Android but I also dont use Grandma's iPhone either.

RE: well
By KGBird on 8/24/2012 10:52:17 PM , Rating: 3
It's crazy that rounded corners can be patented. Every engineer should know that you avoid sharp edges because of the inherent stresses they generate that results in chipping or cracking. Sharp edges are also uncomfortable to the touch.
This was probably never presented in court because the jury would never understand that Apple has patented a standard practice.

Samsung should now charge Apple out the wazoo for the chips.

RE: well
By theapparition on 8/27/2012 10:24:03 AM , Rating: 3
It's crazy that rounded corners can be patented.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, so don't get too upset.

Rounded corners can't be patented.
A rectangle can't be patented.
The color black can't be patented.
A chrome bezel can't be patented.
A center mounted screen can't be patented.

But you can get a design patent that says it's a black phone with a rectangular shape, with uniformly rounded corners, a chrome bezel and center mounted screen with one button. It protects the "look" of the product.

Personally, I don't believe any intelligent person can look at the phones and claim any sort of confusion. I also dismiss the claim that even if there was no confusion, a similarly looking phone caused loss of sales to Apple. But apparently, I'm not on any jury to make the determination.

Samsung should now charge Apple out the wazoo for the chips.

Can't for several reasons. They already have purchase agreements in place to the tune of 5 Billion. It would be a contract violation to break those agreements.
Most importantly, despite our personal opinions, business is business. You MUST act ethically within accepted business practices. If Samsung were to act petty and break those agreements, what other company would trust them as a supplier? They could risk their entire business by doing that.

RE: well
By nafhan on 8/27/2012 4:41:50 PM , Rating: 3
Yep. The big problem here is that there are BIG problems with IP law, and Apple's just the best at taking advantage of the flawed system. Unfortunately, thanks to rulings like this, I think issues with IP law are going to get worse before things get better. How bad they will get... I have no idea, but I do feel a bit worried.

RE: well
By muhahaaha on 8/24/2012 11:12:54 PM , Rating: 2

RE: well
By SongEmu on 8/24/2012 11:51:30 PM , Rating: 2
Korean judge. Soooo biased.

RE: well
By Camikazi on 8/25/2012 12:20:52 AM , Rating: 2
She has Korean ancestry but she was born in the USA, raised in the USA and educated in the USA, I don't expect her to be too friendly to Samsung just cause they are a Korean company. Now her being a bit more biased towards a company that is based in a district her court has jurisdiction over is more likely. If it were me I would ask a neutral 3rd party to preside over this since having an American company vs a Korean company in an American court is a bit biased.

RE: well
By W00dmann on 8/25/12, Rating: -1
RE: well
By Cheesew1z69 on 8/25/2012 5:34:42 PM , Rating: 3
Retarded much?

RE: well
By rob19478 on 8/25/2012 4:05:28 AM , Rating: 4
5. windows phone is still a piece of crap, regardless of what other companies do. what an idiotic interface... and soon you can have that on your desktop, too! no, thanks.

I have a windows 7 phone, and is both easy to use and gorgeous looking.

Still this was a biased trial, knew from when the judge disallowed important samsung evidence that they would loose

RE: well
By Reclaimer77 on 8/25/2012 4:32:01 AM , Rating: 2
You mean the courthouse being literally miles away from Apple's headquarters gave you the impression there was bias here? Color me shocked!

knew from when the judge disallowed important samsung evidence that they would loose

That basically killed any chance of Samsung having a fair trial. Juries accept the "facts" they are given. That ruling allowed Apple's lawyers to tell the jury they invented the smartphone, and prevented Samsung from proving they had not. Or even presenting evidence to the contrary.

RE: well
By althaz on 8/25/2012 4:38:10 AM , Rating: 5
You were going so well up until #5...

Windows Phone has the highest customer satisfaction rates and is widely regarded as market-leading in terms of basic interface. It has problems in other areas (missing features that iOS and Android have, limited software upgrade path, etc), but the interface is not one of them :).

RE: well
By Nyu on 8/25/2012 4:49:14 AM , Rating: 1
biased? obviously bribed.

RE: well
By kmmatney on 8/25/2012 6:28:51 AM , Rating: 3
"3. when exactly has apple ever 'innovated'? "

The original iPhone changed the entire phone landscape - how how you can be any more "innovate" than that. I remember spending an hour at the AT&T store trying NOT to buy the iPhone 3GS, but all the other phones sucked as Android phones didn't exist yet. You can thank Apple for forcing other companies to not make crappy smartphones.

Downrate me now...

RE: well
By cmdrdredd on 8/25/2012 8:52:51 AM , Rating: 1
The original iPhone changed the entire phone landscape - how how you can be any more "innovate" than that. I remember spending an hour at the AT&T store trying NOT to buy the iPhone 3GS, but all the other phones sucked as Android phones didn't exist yet. You can thank Apple for forcing other companies to not make crappy smartphones.

You know...the smartphone as we have it today would have happened anyway. It also wouldn't have resulted in lawsuits over round corners on the device either.

RE: well
By web2dot0 on 8/25/2012 9:36:09 AM , Rating: 2
Someone would of came up with E=mc2, a2+b2=c2, pi, yeah ....

You give it time, anything can be solved. The question is TIMING!

Someone would of came up with Nuclear Bomb eventually. But the US came up with it first.

GET IT?!!?

If you have a rebuttal, at least have some sort of logic.

RE: well
By BSMonitor on 8/27/2012 9:50:45 AM , Rating: 2
You know...the smartphone as we have it today would have happened anyway. It also wouldn't have resulted in lawsuits over round corners on the device either.


RE: well
By Icopoli on 8/25/2012 9:14:29 AM , Rating: 1
It's not called being biased, it's called being paid off :)

RE: well
By damianrobertjones on 8/25/2012 12:08:01 PM , Rating: 2
"5. windows phone is still a piece of crap, regardless of what other companies do. what an idiotic interface... and soon you can have that on your desktop, too! no, thanks."

Eh?? Icons might be icons but they're still in a square grid so you're talking rubbish. Sorry.

P.s. It's ultra easy to use and isn't that the point?

RE: well
By name99 on 8/25/2012 2:21:46 PM , Rating: 2
Shorter GulWestfale:
We were stabbed in the back.
Samsung will rise again.

Pathetic. The difference between adults and children is that adults don't find an excuse no matter what.

RE: well
By highlander2107 on 8/25/2012 6:35:07 PM , Rating: 4
Lost me at:

"when exactly has apple ever 'innovated'?"

I don't own a single Apple product and even I know you need to lay off the crack. You're clearly not a businessman, product creator, advertiser/salesman or engineer.

RE: well
By tayb on 8/25/2012 9:24:28 PM , Rating: 5
3. when exactly has apple ever 'innovated'? as far as i know, they take ideas from others, and then polish them a bit. and i say this as the owner of an MBA, with which i am quite happy. but innovation is something else.

People just have incredibly short memories. Do you not remember the "smartphone" market prior to 2007? It was horrible. Windows Mobile, RIM with trackballs, and Samsung using resistive touch screens with god awful OSes... just to name a few "features" from that time period. Hell, if you wanted a "smart phone" the top of the line models usually came with a stylus. A freaking stylus!!

Android was in development but if you ever saw the early Android builds you would know that it was a RIM clone. They weren't building a touch friendly OS, they were going to take on RIM, and it looked HORRIBLE.

The iPhone changed everything, whether you care to admit it or not. Did the technology exist? Sure. Had anyone put that technology in a phone?? No way. It was literally ground breaking and it brought the other players to their knees. They had nothing, absolutely nothing, to compete with the iPhone. WP7 and Android were created in RESPONSE to the original iPhone. That's innovation. We've all benefited from it.

RE: well
By amanojaku on 8/25/2012 10:59:00 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, you do have a short memory, limited to only the things Apple does that you like.

First off, LG arguably created the first modern touchscreen smartphone when it introduced the Prada. BEFORE Apple.

Second, the technology to create modern touchscreen smartphones wasn't even available or affordable until 2006. Those breakthroughs were not thanks to Apple, since 100% of the components were made by other companies, including Samsung. Apple submitted designs to the manufacturers, which looked eerily similar to Braun products from the 1960s.

These quotes are awesome:

"Apple lawyers are planning to ask that the two dozen Samsung devices found to have infringed its patents be barred from the U.S. market. Most of those devices are "legacy" products with almost nonexistent new sales in the United States."

"Apple should be paying royalties to Sony for stealing their idea of a rectangular portable music player that requires the user to wear earphones."

"Its okay, when apple trys to enter the TV game Samsung can sue em back left and right for making a tv that looks like a tv."

"As a product design engineer, I find the verdict absurd. No code or engineering was taken from Apple and used by Samsung. It would be like Ford suing GM over the Camaro because the Mustang came first. That's called competition, not theft!"

RE: well
By tayb on 8/26/2012 7:36:43 PM , Rating: 2
The Prada? Seriously? Did you ever use that phone? I did. It's great that it beat the iPhone to the market but the phone sucked. It had a capacitive touch screen....aaaaaaand... that's about the best feature of the phone. The iPhone had a well-built and well-designed OS backing the hardware, the Prada did not. The iPhone also managed to outsell the Prada nearly 7:1 despite costing over three times as much. The Prada was a POS.

RE: well
By Reclaimer77 on 8/26/2012 8:49:27 PM , Rating: 2
LOL I love the logic here. What a bunch of pathetic apologist nonsense.

It's great that it beat the iPhone to the market but the phone sucked.

If it "sucked", so what? Are you 12 or something? Prior art means prior art. Please find me a quote from patent law where prior art doesn't count if it can be subjectively judged as "sucking".

It had a capacitive touch screen

This is relevant how? It's not. Chassis design and rounded edges are relevant, no matter what screen technology is in the chassis.

The iPhone had a well-built and well-designed OS backing the hardware

That's great. Give Apple a cookie. In the meantime you can explain to me how this discounts any damn point he was making. Considering how the first iPhone released with an OS that omitted key features and common place things, it's pretty debatable how "well-built" the OS was until the first few major patches.

The iPhone also managed to outsell the Prada nearly 7:1 despite costing over three times as much.

Another fanboish talking point. I wasn't aware patent law and prior art was on a 'winner take all' basis!

By your logic Samsung shouldn't have been sued, because they outsell the iPhone 3 to 1. BOOM!

RE: well
By amanojaku on 8/26/2012 11:04:40 PM , Rating: 3
Rampant fanboyism exists on all sides, but the Apple side takes it to extremes. I'm curious about one thing, though. I never heard of the Samsung F700 until this case. It came out a month after the original iPhone, and looks just like it, yet Apple didn't include that as a device that broke its design patents, and it's listed in the evidence as a pre-iPhone design. Probably because it was a slider, but still...

As someone else here said, the deck was stacked against Samsung. The jury already knew which way it was ruling on day one of deliberations, which is why the verdict came down so quickly.

What I find intriguing is the way the Samsung emails were interpreted.

“All this time we’ve been paying all our attention to Nokia, and concentrated our efforts on things like Folder (flip phone), Bar (candy bar), Slide (keyboard), yet when our [product] is compared to the unexpected competitor Apple’s iPhone, the difference is truly that of Heaven and Earth,” according to the email. “It’s a crisis of design.”

“Can you show me the document that shows me that there’s a crisis in design compared to Nokia?” (Apple lawyer William) Lee asked (Samsung Chief Strategy Officer Justin) Denison.

“No I can’t,” Denison said.

“The only documents that you can identify from Samsung that refer to a crisis in design… refer to the iPhone,” Lee said.
Basically, Samsung looked to Nokia, then the market leader, as the standard prior to the iPhone, yet Nokia never sued Samsung.

When the iPhone came out, every manufacturer ridiculed the form factor. Without a flip the screen was exposed, and it cracked often. Without the candy bar or slider all keys were virtual, and hard to press accurately. No one thought the iPhone would sell due to those limitations, yet it killed. The "crisis" was the realization that the masses didn't care, they just loved the way it looked.

Funny thing is, iPhone screens still crack, and the keys are still hard to press. I don't know anyone who can type on the damn thing quickly, and everyone I know has the phone in a bumper or sleeve. People say the iPhone is advanced, but the iPhone design is a step BACKWARDS, in my opinion.

RE: well
By BSMonitor on 8/27/2012 10:02:29 AM , Rating: 2
Umm, if the F700 was a sliding keyboard phone, it was much like an iPhone at all. Weird.

RE: well
By daar on 8/26/2012 4:17:09 PM , Rating: 2
Didn't matter if Samsung/LG had an awful OS, they were pioneering the availability of touch screens and complex OS to the consumer market.

What Apple did was the same thing but made improvements in both respective areas.

Did LG sue and try to ban the iPhone because they previously had a rectangular phone with touch screen capabilities? No, it was a good product and they (among other companies) decided to learn from it.

Samsung, with the help of Google's OS, introduced the Galaxy line of products which is selling well. Many people have decided to purchase it over Apple products because they feel it does some things better than Apple's products.

Instead of Apple learning and improving their product to match this, like all other companies have done before to reach the point we are at, Apple has decided to sue them out. Absurd.

RE: well
By Tony Swash on 8/27/2012 9:36:33 AM , Rating: 1
2. the rectangle with rounded corners shape should not ever be patentable, as it is an obvious shape. ever played poker? have a credit card? take a look at which shape they are in. it's an obvious shape for a handheld product. furthermore, it was used in consumer electronics well before the iphone came along.

Do you realise that Samsung were found not to have infringed the rectangle?

RE: well
By BSMonitor on 8/27/2012 9:46:08 AM , Rating: 2
No, they don't bother reading. They already know everything... LMAO

Where is...
By DigitalFreak on 8/24/2012 10:02:10 PM , Rating: 4
Where's that Steve Jobs cum burper Tony Swash. Figured he'd make an appearance by now.

RE: Where is...
By GulWestfale on 8/24/2012 10:37:02 PM , Rating: 2
nah, it's past his bedtime.

RE: Where is...
By B3an on 8/25/2012 5:30:11 AM , Rating: 3
If i remember, Tony is actually over 40. Which just makes it all even more sad and pathetic.

RE: Where is...
By drycrust3 on 8/25/2012 7:11:31 AM , Rating: 2
He put a comment below.

RE: Where is...
By muhahaaha on 8/25/2012 11:53:11 AM , Rating: 2
people of age tend to be smarter than teenagers and such; this is not the case with this dork. An Apple employee most likely, and drinking the cool-aid, but at most a retail iJob. Haha try developing software for a major corporation and see how small the iPenis is.

RE: Where is...
By W00dmann on 8/25/12, Rating: -1
RE: Where is...
By Tony Swash on 8/26/12, Rating: -1
RE: Where is...
By Quadrillity on 8/25/2012 1:46:51 PM , Rating: 2
Nah, he's too busy jacking off. Probably wont be back for several days after he is released from the ICU.

RE: Where is...
By Tony Swash on 8/25/12, Rating: -1
RE: Where is...
By themaster08 on 8/26/2012 3:33:41 AM , Rating: 3
Hey, Tony. I know you've avoided this question once, so let's see if you can take the time from your cackling to actually provide some logical debate...

Do you think it's right that Apple should be allowed to own "a rectangle with rounded edges"? Should any company be allowed to own the rights to a shape?

RE: Where is...
By Tony Swash on 8/26/12, Rating: -1
RE: Where is...
By DFranch on 8/26/2012 2:31:43 PM , Rating: 1
Why don't you pretend this is a court of law where you wouldn't be able to drone on and on for 6 paragraphs dancing around a simple yes or no answer.

Yes or No, Should you be able to patent a rectangle with rounded corners?

RE: Where is...
By Tony Swash on 8/26/2012 6:38:13 PM , Rating: 2
That's a 'when did you stop beating your wife' debating type question, it does not relate to actual real world issues this case involved, which were about product copying. Why don't you answer this question. In your opinion and having heard the evidence in the trial do you think Samsung copied Apple's designs and products?

RE: Where is...
By themaster08 on 8/27/2012 4:19:30 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not talking about the case. Stop avoiding the question. Answer with a yes or no.

RE: Where is...
By Tony Swash on 8/27/2012 6:04:21 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not talking about the case.

Yes you are. Stop avoiding the question. Answer with a yes or no. Do you think Samsung copied Apple's products?

RE: Where is...
By themaster08 on 8/27/2012 10:43:08 AM , Rating: 2
Yes I do, and this has helped to leverage Samsung into the number 1 spot. However this has become less-so over time and I don't believe for a second that anyone with even a single brain cell bought a Samsung smartphone under the assumption that it was an iPhone. That would take some doing, especially since all of Samsung's phones have a huge SAMSUNG on the front of them. I think this entire debacle should end now.

My issue isn't with copying, it's with Apple being granted frivilous patents. Patents that require absolutely no research and development, are used in every day life and can give Apple a stranglehold on the market, such as the patenting of a simple shape. Now be a man and stop answering my question with further questions. Do you think it's right that a company is allowed to own a patent to a rectangle with rounded edges?

RE: Where is...
By Cheesew1z69 on 8/27/2012 10:08:18 AM , Rating: 2
Do not bother, you aren't going to get an answer... QFT...

And they call this justice
By JohnWPB on 8/24/2012 10:37:05 PM , Rating: 2
I bet the rest of the world is shaking it's head and wondering what has happened to the American justice system.

Get a corrupt judge, let that judge throw out evidence she doesn't want to influence the jury, and then have a jury that knows jack sh*t about patents, plus a patent system that honors patents for stuff that should NEVER have been given a patent for, and you have the start of what will be a major shift in how companies are going to create products.

Thanks to Apple, the market will be beat back into the dark ages.

My fervent hope is that somebody is right now p*ssing on Jobs grave.

RE: And they call this justice
By Lord 666 on 8/24/2012 11:24:57 PM , Rating: 2
Feel bad for Lance Armstrong, not a company.

RE: And they call this justice
By teflonbilly on 8/24/2012 11:52:48 PM , Rating: 2
Yes! Now that was injustice. Though totally off topic.

RE: And they call this justice
By web2dot0 on 8/25/2012 9:44:12 AM , Rating: 1
You mean guilty as charge?

If he's innocent, fight the charges. Because I would.

Now .... replace Lance Armstrong with Michael Phelps.

I'm telling you to handle over 21medals and erase all your Olympic accomplishments. Would you fight my charges to the bitter end?

Just keeping it real.

If you can answer me with a straight face that you are willing to forfeit your right to defend yourself, then there's nothing to talk about. You can call it witch-hunt, abc, whatever you want, but hear yourself think before you answer back.

He's about as innocent as Carl Lewis. ;-D Look how that turned out. "I swear to my mother's grave that I did not cheat". OKAY. I trust you.

RE: And they call this justice
By Reclaimer77 on 8/25/2012 9:58:24 AM , Rating: 2
The U.S Anti-Doping committee shouldn't even exist. Why do we need a tax payer funded Government organization like this? On the national level? Why?

Secondly they have no authority to make "charges" against someone. They are not law enforcement. So they accuse him of something, and when he doesn't "fight" it, they assume he's guilty by default. Maybe he's tired of fighting rumors and suspicions? His record should speak for itself!

He's been tested thousands of times and passed them all. Blood, urine, the works. It's not even physically possible that he was "doping" to win all those races, so get a clue.

Damn right this is a witch hunt with nothing behind it but hearsay. Your line of thinking is dangerous and stupid. This isn't a court of law, and in America a man is innocent until proven guilty by one.

"Keeping it real" doesn't include stupidity. You're a dumbass, THAT is keeping it real.

RE: And they call this justice
By Brandon Hill on 8/25/2012 12:47:13 PM , Rating: 2
For once, I agree 100% with Reclaimer. Imagine that...

RE: And they call this justice
By Reclaimer77 on 8/25/2012 12:57:29 PM , Rating: 1
lol that is not "for once". We've agreed on lots of stuff.

RE: And they call this justice
By BSMonitor on 8/27/2012 10:07:01 AM , Rating: 2
But as always Brandon, Reclaimer is still "right".

Even when he is obviously proven wrong:

-Patent ‘889 (iPad design – specifically, “clean front, edge-to-edge glass, thin bezel, thin outer border, and rounded corners”): On this patent, Samsung and its Galaxy Tab devices were determined to not have infringed on Apple’s patent, although monetary rewards were yielded to Apple — something that has been called to the court’s attention and is being reviewed.

RE: And they call this justice
By Azethoth on 8/25/2012 8:17:25 PM , Rating: 2
Amen brother on the useless government committee. If the government pays/subsidizes something like baseball then fine regulate away. But stay the hell out of cycling. It has nothing to do with you.

On the real side of things I can only tell you what my sister who cycles almost professionally has to say: The Lance Armstrong that cycled after he came back from nut cancer in no way resembles the Lance from before. The improvements were ... extraordinary.

Personally though I do not give a damn, Lance is innocent of all charges and the greatest cyclist ever!

RE: And they call this justice
By Reclaimer77 on 8/26/2012 1:00:51 PM , Rating: 2
The Lance Armstrong that cycled after he came back from nut cancer in no way resembles the Lance from before.

I'm sure some want to point to this as evidence of doping, but that's really jealousy. Why would he wait until he's nearly out of his cycling prime to start cheating?

I've never faced death the way Armstrong has, but I hear it changes a man.

Lance is innocent of all charges and the greatest cyclist ever!

100% correct. It's just abhorrent to me that we live in a society like this. If all it takes is the word of someone else to strip someone of their achievements, what's the point of all that drug testing? Why even have them if you can pass literally thousands of them without a single failure, and still get punished?

Apple's strategy going forward could be a disaster
By ptmmac on 8/24/2012 10:53:13 PM , Rating: 2
Apple has already offered a motion to get an injunction against sales of Samsung phones in the US that violate this ruling. I suspect that Apple already knows what Samsung is planning to do and that does not include settling this war before several more battles have been fought. I do not believe that it is in Apple's best interest to fight this to the bitter end. I may be naive, but I do believe that in the long run our system tends to get things like this right. I don't believe that Apple should take this ruling as carte blanche to ride over all the competition from Android. The other Android manufacturers have not as slavishly copied Apple. They are not going to be the easy target that Samsung has been. Apple needs competition and it does not need the distraction of legal wrangling to be it's primary business product.

I think it is worth noting that Samsung is more than just a copy cat. They make high quality products, especially components in cellphones, and they take pride in the quality of the products they make. Culturally, they do not "see" that copying the "best" in a competitors product is anything more than competition. Apple's management needs to do more than just dismiss Samsung as "Samesung". They need to realize that there are a lot of people, like the community here, who honestly believe we would be better off if Samsung could make their high quality knock offs. Many of those people feel that technology improvements and small businesses would benefit if IP rules made it much harder to obtain a patent. If you think that it is okay to download stolen software, music, or porn then you probably shouldn't be angry at Samsung. I actually think the price Samsung paid is in line with what should be reasonable for the actions they took. I don't think suing some kid for tens of thousands of dollars for downloading a few songs is reasonable. People that run servers that actively benefit from showing stolen products should be hit much harder. That is my view and it is pretty consistent with what I believe to be fair and reasonable.

Apple still needs Samsung to make the high quality parts that are used in the iPhone. There is an extensive class of patents which Samsung uses to make those products which Apple has been benefiting from. If you have been paying attention to the news you would realize that Apple has had big quality issues with the LG panels being used to build the new retina macbook pro. Apple should be willing to settle this dispute with Samsung without hanging all of their business on the results from this one case. One of the best bloggers on the web, Asymco's Horace Deidu, made the point that suing your competitor for IP infringements like this is not a good business plan. When pressed to comment on the odds of Apple winning this lawsuit Horace replied: "Again, I don’t have an opinion on legal matters. Broadly speaking, IP litigation is similar to playing the lottery." Apple has now made the point that it should not be copied directly and protected their intellectual property rights. The real question now is will Apple take the high road, and lock in the win they have made in this case and offer to cross license technology with their partner, Samsung. There is plenty of money to be made by both parties. The smartphone and tablet markets taken together is the largest market by gross product that has ever been conceived of. Hundreds of billions of Dollars of profits are on the table at this point. A simple effort to avoid infringing on each other's trade dress, and a cross license of all technical and software patents would be a huge win for both Apple and Samsung. Please remember that Apple never made any great products until they quit fighting Microsoft in court and put the heart and soul of the company into the effort to make new products for the "digital life"

By Helbore on 8/25/2012 9:53:47 AM , Rating: 2
The ball is in both of their courts. If Apple attempt to get a blanket ban on all of Samsung's smartphone products - as some think they will now do - then they wouldn't be offering much of an olive branch for Samsung to take.

If Apple want to end this war, they need to say to Samsung "pay the fine and we won't ban those products." Being that most of the ones found in infringement are last-gen anyway, it would seem pointless to pursue it.

They also need to not insist that Samsung pay royalties for licensing Apple patents, but attempt to put together a mutually-beneficial cross-licensing deal, in which both parties get access to the others patents.

That's the best way it can work. If all sides cross-license their patents, then we can get rid of all this legal stupidity and the consumers can get a range of products to choose from.

But it's down to all sides to play nice. My gut feeling is that neither side will and this will go on up to a higher court for review.

By Pneumothorax on 8/25/2012 10:07:43 AM , Rating: 2
All Samsung has to do is have a few 'fires' at a few of the factories that make the A5x (or whatever Samsung-manufactured CPU the iPhone 5 will use) and the LCD's the day after the iPhone 5 is released. That will do a nice number on Apple's stock price.

By elleehswon on 8/25/2012 11:08:18 AM , Rating: 2
rather that be blatant as that, just make sure the soc's have backdoors into them, which, when triggered, hard-brick the device.

By muhahaaha on 8/25/2012 11:23:32 AM , Rating: 2
your POSt is too long, the average reader will pass it by.

By ReloadAO on 8/25/2012 12:22:44 PM , Rating: 2
already passed :)

Shows how ridicious America's patent system is.
By pugster on 8/25/2012 12:46:31 AM , Rating: 2
I can't blame the jurors about this because they are following the guidelines based on America's patent laws where you can basically patent anything. If Apple decides to sue Samsung in any other country, Apple would probably lose.

Copying at its finist
By legendzero1 on 8/25/2012 3:11:07 AM , Rating: 2
Gotta love how apple 'copied' and 'pasted' it's own comment to both internal employees and The New York Times:

"It’s about values. We value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth."

Because we all know Apple innovates in everything that they do....except taking the time to create a different sentence.

RE: Copying at its finist
By legendzero1 on 8/25/2012 3:12:06 AM , Rating: 2
finest* before the Apple troolllllllolololols.

RE: Copying at its finist
By inperfectdarkness on 8/26/2012 9:28:50 AM , Rating: 2
i especially love how apple was "reluctant" to engage in lawsuit. i'm pretty sure if i belched the word "rectangle with rounded corners" that apple would sue me.

Wait for it...
By ritualm on 8/24/2012 9:35:02 PM , Rating: 4
"I don't care! Apple is GOD!"

- Tony Swash(patented)

By kamiller422 on 8/24/2012 9:42:11 PM , Rating: 4
By Stephen! on 8/25/2012 1:55:54 PM , Rating: 2
Apple, Samsung Release Statements Following Court Decision; Microsoft Gloats

Seems like bad karma for Microsoft to gloat, considering Apple could likely go after them someday.

The end of June, Microsoft entered the tablet industry-controlled territory, which until now Apple, with the launch of Surface tablet. Even without a doubt, Microsoft CEO, Steve Ballmer, openly declared ” war” against Apple.

RE: Microsoft
By Brandon Hill on 8/25/2012 2:00:21 PM , Rating: 2
As I stated and linked in the article, Microsoft is safe from Apple:

By FITCamaro on 8/26/2012 8:49:22 AM , Rating: 2
They were about values. At Apple, we value originality and innovation

Yeah nevermind if we didn't actually come up with those original ideas or innovate on something first. We just patent it first and then say others stole it from us.

RE: Ahem
Bill Cox
By DigitalFreak on 8/24/2012 10:04:27 PM , Rating: 2
Bill Cox's wife's maiden name is Chokesondick.

RE: Bill Cox
By Belard on 8/26/2012 7:06:28 PM , Rating: 1
Bill Cox can go suck on everyones dick.

Most of us are not going to be buying POS WP8 phones.

Dear Bill
By muhahaaha on 8/25/2012 12:43:53 PM , Rating: 3
Dear Bill,

Win8 will be the next Vista, I assure you.

Balmer is a total numb nuts and needs to be relieved.

My stock continues to go down, but I still have faith in MS (barely).

The big problem is Windows 8 = FAIL.

As a developer, I have some knowledge of how this happened... A feud between two of your top people, most notably Steven Sinofsky.

Would you please drop kick Sinofsky and Balmer? What a bunch of tools.

Your empire is falling, and your arch rival named Apple is about to clean your clock.

Do you care anymore? Probably not... but you should.

And MacDevDude might become the god of the universe.

Please help!

The obvious
By Tony Swash on 8/26/2012 5:29:14 AM , Rating: 1
When the iPhone debuted, it was widely criticized for having no buttons/keys. Now people think the iPhone’s design is “obvious.

Dan Frakes

RE: The obvious
By BSMonitor on 8/27/2012 9:57:06 AM , Rating: 2
LMAO, exactly. AT&T taking a HUGE chance carrying it.. I think a similar discussion occurred with the iPad's release...

By qledo on 8/25/2012 6:25:49 AM , Rating: 2
By 2bdetermine on 8/25/2012 11:43:59 AM , Rating: 2
We make these products to delight our customers, not for our competitors to flagrantly copy.

What constituted flagrantly copy? So you can made icon bounce, pinch to zoom etc. so can I. Is the Apple codes work on Samsung devices? Talking about rectangle device with round corner sound similar to what I had bought so many years ago and still using it today. And what exactly Apple inventing, vague drawings and called it patents.

By BZDTemp on 8/25/2012 2:56:31 PM , Rating: 2
No surprise that a US company won in court over a company from South Korea - from what I understand one of the jury members even had personal finances to consider.

rectangles with rounded corners
By tharik on 8/26/2012 12:29:34 PM , Rating: 2
I am just glad the Apple did not patent rectangles with rounded corners earlier, or else we would be paying an Apple tax on TV's and monitors.

By Tony Swash on 8/26/2012 7:15:13 PM , Rating: 2

What Samsung did was logical, made good business sense and was successful. Apple's legal response to What Samsung did was logical, made good business sense and looks like being successful.

What about the AirPhone 4?
By Belard on 8/27/2012 1:16:33 AM , Rating: 2
There is not a single Samsung or other branded phone that looks like an damn iPhone. Yet, Apple has singled out their supplier and tech-expert company to go after? Samsung made the iPhone possible because of their years of experience with phone technology. iPhone: Look and UI made in California with guts designed and made in Korea (mostly) / China then built in China by slave labor.

But why has Apple NOT gone after the AirPhone4? Its a cheap chinese knock-off. The box and UI looks like Apple/iPhone. Its very much NOT an iPhone, its barely functional as a phone at all. I think about 30~60min battery life, lots of crashes. It even has fake screws molded into the fake-metal strip around the body (Real iPhone4 has real screws).

Check out the images and video on you-tube... it kind of funny. Yet... Apple ignores A REAL rip-off of their phone.

This alone should PROVE that Apple isn't going after Samsung because of anything other than the simple fact that Samsung is taking market share away from Apple!

Hey Apple, you JUST lost an iPad sale from me.

What were the Jurors thinking?
By Tony Swash on 8/26/2012 5:25:18 AM , Rating: 1
In a pair of reports from Reuters and CNET, jury foreman Velvin Hogan and juror Manuel Ilagan described what went on behind closed doors as the nine-member group deliberated the landmark verdict. Their remarks make it plain that there deliberations were rational and considered but the verdict was pretty easy to reach because the evidence was so clear cut.

In an interview on Saturday, jury foreman Velvin Hogan, 67, said Apple's arguments about the need to protect innovation were persuasive in the jury room. He also said video testimony from senior Samsung executives made it "absolutely" clear to them that the infringement was purposeful.

We weren't impatient," Ilagan said. "We wanted to do the right thing, and not skip any evidence. I think we were thorough.We found for Apple because of the evidence they presented. It was clear there was infringement."

Foreman Hogan echoed the juror's sentiment, telling Reuters that video testimony from Samsung officials made it "absolutely" clear that the company willfully infringed on Apple's trade dress. He went on to say Apple's arguments for the protection of intellectual property factored largely into the jury's decision.

We didn't want to give carte blanche to a company, by any name, to infringe someone else's intellectual property," Hogan said.

As for Samsung's claims of infringement, Ilagan said the company lost the jury when it tried to leverage two UMTS wireless patents against Apple, one of which involved the communications chip in the iPhone and iPad. Apple refuted this specific claim and pointed to a Samsung licensing deal with Intel, the maker of the iDevice chips. The agreement stated that Samsung was not allowed to sue any company to which Intel sold that particular component, a licensing safeguard known as patent exhaustion.

Once you determine that Samsung violated the patents, it's easy to just go down those different [Samsung] products, because it was all the same," Ilagan said. "Like the trade dress -- once you determine Samsung violated the trade dress, the flat screen with the Bezel...then you go down the products to see if it had a bezel. But we took our time. We didn't rush. We had a debate before we made a decision. Sometimes it was getting heated."

Jurors felt Samsung should pay significant damages in the landmark patent trial against Apple, even though they viewed Apple's demands as too high, according to the foreman.

"We wanted to make sure the message we sent was not just a slap on the wrist," Hogan said. "We wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful, but not unreasonable."

At one point during the second day of deliberations, jurors turned off the lights in the room to settle a debate about the potential influence screen brightness might have on Apple's graphics interface. Their verdict: Apple's designs were unique.

"All of us feel we were fair, that we can stand by our verdict and that we have a clear conscience in that we were totally not biased one way or another," Hogan said.

Unpalatable truths and the future of Android
By Tony Swash on 8/25/12, Rating: -1
RE: Unpalatable truths and the future of Android
By inaphasia on 8/25/2012 8:34:18 AM , Rating: 1
Tony, one day I hope you come to realize that there are quite a few people out there that think Thomas Edison was a patent trolling cunt too. It's got absolutely nothing to do with which phone/gadget is prettier, came first, or is more useful to the user.

RE: Unpalatable truths and the future of Android
By Tony Swash on 8/25/12, Rating: -1
By inaphasia on 8/25/2012 11:17:34 AM , Rating: 2
No Tony, I'm not angry. I couldn't be. I don't own anything by Samsung and I don't have an Android device either.

My point was that nobody likes a patent troll.

My point was that it's ok to call a genius like Edison a cunt if you think you can back up your opinion when challenged.

My point was that sociopaths are not good role-models.

By Jeffk464 on 8/25/2012 10:01:20 AM , Rating: 2
No, its time to boycott apple.

By ReloadAO on 8/25/2012 12:24:21 PM , Rating: 2
one more to skip.

RE: Unpalatable truths and the future of Android
By Kyuu on 8/25/2012 4:05:25 PM , Rating: 2
I still honestly can't decide if Tony Swash is truly as delusional as he comes off or if he's just a really, really dedicated troll.

I have zero vested interest in the success or failure of Apple, Samsung, or whatever. I'm not even a fan of Android, though I'd certainly never purchase an Apple device again after all the patent trolling Apple has engaged in. Hell, I grew up using a Mac when everyone else had Wintel machines.

But, for any clear-thinking individual, the absurdity of this case (and Apple's victory) is difficult to grasp. The patents are nonsense: rectangular devices with rounded corners? Minor UI animations? If Android's source code was straight ripped from iOS and the only DIFFERENCE were some minor UI quibbles, THEN I could see a case being made. But with Android having little in common with iOS EXCEPT FOR some minor UI quibbles that should not be patentable in the first place, there really is no case.

Luckily, it should be fairly obvious to whatever higher court(s) the appeal(s) go to that this case was not handled appropriately and this verdict will get tossed out. 'Course, with the U.S. court system, that might take a while, but eventually it'll happen.

I have no desire to see Apple out of the smartphone/OS market, but the blatant misuse of the legal system for anti-competitive purposes really needs to stop.

By Cheesew1z69 on 8/25/2012 5:41:32 PM , Rating: 2
Delusional Troll...

RE: Unpalatable truths and the future of Android
By tecknurd on 8/25/2012 10:31:06 PM , Rating: 1
The Android OS is an open source project. What this means it will live on forever. iOS is not open source and it is controlled by a company. A company that is easily created and eventually will die. Google is same, but Android has the support of the open source community. When there are people supporting the open source community and there is a open source projects, those projects will live on forever. Sure when Google goes out of business, Android my die with it, but there will be forks of it. When that happens there will be DIY kits of smartphones that is hard for Apple to complain about. Heck, Apple has not yet complain about hackintoshs. Apple won this time, but I am sure Samsung now knows the game of the US court system. Though Samsung Galaxy SIII is not banned, so Apple did not win everything.

Android is in my Nook, it is in cellphones, tablets, Rasberry PI and other single board computers, so it is everywhere. iOS is only at one place.

By Belard on 8/27/2012 12:50:24 AM , Rating: 1
I think and hope the way things are going - Android and Linux become the standard that replaces Microsoft and Apple.

Metro sucks on the desktop, MS-Phone sales are very piss-poor. Not many people are wetting their pants for an Win8 tablet.

The Apple lawsuit WIN is so stupid, so full of shit... that I have decided to NOT replace my iPad1 with an iPad4.

Window8 is so bad, I downloaded and installed LinuxMint within hours.

No surprise MS is happy about it
By Pirks on 8/24/12, Rating: -1
RE: No surprise MS is happy about it
By Iketh on 8/24/2012 10:16:44 PM , Rating: 2
There will be plenty of Win8 hardware Oct 26th... get a tablet to supplement. Keep your phone a phone.

I honestly can't figure out yet if I'll take that route myself or prefer a "phablet"...

RE: No surprise MS is happy about it
By Jeffk464 on 8/25/2012 9:56:20 AM , Rating: 2
I love my phablet, its always on me. A tablet is something that you use sitting on your couch or in the office or something. You use a phablet whenever, like getting stuck in line or waiting for your food in a restaurant, etc.

By erikejw on 8/26/2012 10:43:49 AM , Rating: 2
This will all end in tears.

Maybe China, India and the rest of Asia is learning how to create good laws for themselves. 3 Billion people market compared to 300 million.

In 20 years Asias economy will be 5 times USA+Europe in high tech markets.

Discussions in incomprehensible language behind closed doors 20 years from now:If Apple can patent the rectangle we must be capable to patent geometry. We did use fire and water before the native Indians so we have prior art on all materials containing oxygene, carbon, hydrogen. So products containing that will be severe infringements.

Isn't that unfair?: Life isnt fair, they need us, not the other way around. We are the market and you cant argue the market is wrong, can you. Well, argue our military had a secret patent archive all those years. Nothing new with that, evil grinn.
They have to prove us wrong.

They simply has to take it to our supreme court and the trial will be fair and balanced, right.

They might be the first with apples but we have oranges. Well call the company Clockwork Orange.

RE: No surprise MS is happy about it
By Reclaimer77 on 8/25/2012 12:01:38 AM , Rating: 2
On what planet do you see a "ban" happening here? Samsung isn't "banned" from doing business here. This will be tied up for years in appeals anyway. Nothing has changed all that much.

A Samsung smartphone with sharp corners will still kick as much Windows Phone ass as they did with rounded ones.

But after Samsung is banned I think WP8 may see some decent sales

Hardly a thrilling endorsement for Windows Phone is it? "Ban" the competition if you can't beat it.

Only trolling idiot fanboi's see this as some kind of "win". We, the consumers, are the ones who lose when competition gets eliminated and monopolies are allowed to form. I don't believe this will happen, but it's scarey to see that in your mind this is already the case. And it's somehow a good thing.

RE: No surprise MS is happy about it
By muhahaaha on 8/25/2012 11:41:23 AM , Rating: 3
I'm a software developer and I'm going to keep this short...

Win8 is a joke. If it wasn't for the fact that MS finally got everything working properly with OpenCL (Direct Compute) on the desktop - (like OSX Mountain Lion did a while ago), there would be little difference from Win7.

Whine all you want, Win8 is a service pack enabling Metro (Modern) style apps (crap that can run on the desktop and also a phone or tablet).

It all stems from a douche bag's decision to kill Silverlight and Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF). His name is Steven Sinofsky. He will be the destroyer of Windows and his throat is already targeted by many.

I wish Bill Gates would take a few hours out of his new "saving the world" crap and drop kick some douches at MS.

RE: No surprise MS is happy about it
By Iketh on 8/25/2012 1:05:23 PM , Rating: 2
I'm also a developer and don't feel nearly the same way as you. I'm dying to get my apps on tablets.

The only developers I've found that are upset about Silverlight and WPF are those that have invested time in them, and they are madder than you in person (don't bring it up around them). I haven't invested time in either, and because of this, I'm happy. Reduce the redundancy PLEASE!

HTML5 is the future.

RE: No surprise MS is happy about it
By Reclaimer77 on 8/25/12, Rating: -1
RE: No surprise MS is happy about it
By Iketh on 8/25/2012 3:11:58 PM , Rating: 2
And that makes their point of view any less valid?

Yes, they're biased.

RE: No surprise MS is happy about it
By Reclaimer77 on 8/25/2012 3:54:36 PM , Rating: 2
lol by that logic you're equally as biased because you DON'T work with Silverlight. Hello?

Not saying some aren't biased, but it seems like you are just using that as an excuse to brush aside any criticism with a single sweep.

RE: No surprise MS is happy about it
By Iketh on 8/25/2012 9:00:55 PM , Rating: 3
Saying I'm brushing aside the criticism is exactly what I'm doing. The whole point of me replying to his post is to try to discredit the MS bashing. I'm glad you're following along.

I've yet to hear someone say, "Man, I'm bummed about Silverlight. I wanted to learn it so bad!" That's because there are other (and presumably better) options. Reducing redundancy is a good thing, except to those that are on the losing end.

Saying I'm biased against Silverlight is silly. I could care less if Silverlight was the winning/losing technology. I just want a clear lane to travel, and thankfully that's what I'm getting.

RE: No surprise MS is happy about it
By tayb on 8/26/2012 3:53:58 PM , Rating: 2
Silverlight sucks. I'm sorry that you invested time in it. I am looking forward to developing metro apps and having a unified distribution platform. WPF is not dead either, just so you know. No one is going to stop you from making windows 8 desktop apps using WPF. I'm not sure what makes you think otherwise.n

RE: No surprise MS is happy about it
By Helbore on 8/25/2012 9:36:31 AM , Rating: 2
I do wonder if this might end up making WP8 more popular with manufacturers. Samsung make WP devices, too and they will be protected by Microsoft's legal cover, as 1) MS will defend their OEM partners and, 2) MS have a cross licensing deal with Apple and its just as important for Apple to protect that as Microsoft.

All Samsung has to do is make the Galaxy S4 a Windows Phone variant and see how it goes. There's no risk at all in them trying and potentially a lot less legal hassle if it succeeds.

RE: No surprise MS is happy about it
By muhahaaha on 8/25/2012 11:46:40 AM , Rating: 2
yeah and become SamSuck in the process. WP8 isn't going anywhere dude. I'd even side with MacDevDude on this one.

By Helbore on 8/25/2012 8:26:26 PM , Rating: 2
It's fair enough to question the likelihood of that scenario. I'm only putting out a possibility and not "fanboying" for some side. It's a possible course of action that they could take, even if its risky and has no guarantee of commercial success. I'm not even saying its necessarily a good idea, so don't think I'm making some bold, definitive statement here.

Certainly, don't feel I'm drawing a line that would require you to side with Macdevdude. I would never do that to anyone.

"We shipped it on Saturday. Then on Sunday, we rested." -- Steve Jobs on the iPad launch

Latest Headlines
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki