backtop


Print 116 comment(s) - last by Pirks.. on Sep 30 at 1:15 PM


  (Source: ABC)
Samsung gains a partner in its fight against Apple

Verizon may be elated to have the iPhone 4 on its network at the present time, but that isn't stopping the U.S. wireless carrier from protecting its interests when it comes to LTE marketing/deployments and Android handsets/tablets.

In early July, Apple filed an injunction calling for an end to U.S. sales of the Infuse 4G, Galaxy S 4G, Droid Charge, and Galaxy Tab 10.1. Three of the patent violations Apple cited claimed that Samsung was copycatting the iPhone's overall design and button location. Another patent inferred that Samsung was infringing on a method of "list scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display" with its Android-based smartphones and tablets.

Verizon has filed for a "friend of the court" petition that, according to FOSS Patents, means Verizon has a vested interest in the outcome of Apple's lawsuit against Samsung. Any negative action taken against Samsung (i.e., removing its Android-based devices from the U.S. market) would harm Verizon's efforts to provide LTE devices for its high-speed network.

Verizon reports that Apple's actions:

Would hinder Verizon Wireless in developing and deploying its next generation high-speed LTE [fourth-generation] network, the job growth dependent on that network, and will undercut key public policy goals, including expansion of America’s access to broadband networks and faster communication with emergency personnel...

An injunction would prohibit some of the newest, most advanced wireless devices sold today and impede the growth of Verizon Wireless’s high-speed 4G network. The accused Samsung devices are among the few products that can access Verizon Wireless's next-generation high speed network and therefore are among the most sought-after devices by early-adopting consumers – a critical market segment in the industry. Verizon Wireless has invested and is investing billions in developing and deploying its next-generation Long Term Evolution ('LTE') 4G network. 

Verizon has been on the warpath when it comes to deploying its LTE network. The company is far ahead of rival AT&T when it comes to actual deployments. Verizon's LTE network launched in December 2010, and is currently available in 143 markets (reaching a total of 160 million Americans). AT&T's LTE network, which launched this past Sunday, is only available in five markets, reaching a total of 70 million Americans by year's end.



Comments     Threshold


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

Interesting Analogy
By JasonMick (blog) on 9/24/2011 8:02:02 PM , Rating: 5
Apple lawsuit campaign is somewhat analogous to the German Blitzkrieg in WWII. Fueled by propoganda, claims of superiority, frenzied cries that it needs to eradicate "unpure" rivals, and a huge cash stockpile Apple, like Germany, is fast gaining early victories. Despite essentially losing the battle in the Netherlands, they've won an early victory in the much larger German market with the German (irony!) court siding with Apple.

But like Germany in WWII, the drive/Blitzkrieg is appearing unsustainable. Apple is making too many enemies and generating too much negative PR from trying to sue its top rivals -- HTC, Motorola, and Samsung.

Eventually this is likely to massively backfire on them. Maybe them Tim Cook and Steve Jobs will regret starting this war, when the allies emerge victorious and they're left explaining to shareholders why the f'ed up the company's brand name.




RE: Interesting Analogy
By JasonMick (blog) on 9/24/2011 8:03:26 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Maybe them
Maybe then... (typo, sorry!)


RE: Interesting Analogy
By macdevdude on 9/25/11, Rating: -1
RE: Interesting Analogy
By mdogs444 on 9/25/2011 8:39:25 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Ur spelling is almost as as bad as ur comment.

quote:
When Samsung products r all banned

quote:
Ull probably whine about how unfair us courts

When attacking someone for spelling and bad comments, be sure not to do the same thing.
quote:
You don't get it tho.

You don't either.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By MechanicalTechie on 9/25/2011 9:00:56 PM , Rating: 2
Silly silly, easily lead 'I wanna be cool syndrome' boy. Have you ever thought to think why so many people are now against Apple??

Open your eyes sunshine, Apple is destorying innovation and it's patent trolling is totally backfiring. If people like you didnt exist Apple would still be in the doldrums.. but hey.. don't listen to the rest of us.. where all wrong according to you.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By TakinYourPoints on 9/26/11, Rating: -1
RE: Interesting Analogy
By MechanicalTechie on 9/26/2011 3:03:37 AM , Rating: 2
Just because Samsung used a similar design doesn't mean they copied straight from, they we're just lazy and used the most oblivious... like Apple did. So what if the buttons are in a similar place... or in a black square case... i mean seriously boo hoo... cry me a river. Motion Technology have been creating tablets for 10+ years, and they seem very similar to the iPoo, but you don’t hear them lodging law suits.

People care too much about the aesthetics and not about the funcionality, Samsung is different for better or worst, but if you can patent a very general design then many things will fail under it, and that is where Samsung got stung... perhaps they wanted to trick the iSuck users... i dunno, maybe.

End of the day I don't really care about what they do, I’m not stupid enough to purchase Apple, I only care when they start affecting the completion because then we all lose.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By TakinYourPoints on 9/26/2011 6:08:34 AM , Rating: 3
http://www.businessinsider.com/samsung-designs-201...

Defending a company's behavior like this with the "innovation" excuse is disingenuous. Samsung has a long history of doing this, and they've actually been sued before by RIM for similar reasons. Samsung is good as a component manufacturer but they are just a step above Chinese knock-off manufacturers when it comes to consumer goods.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By robinthakur on 9/26/11, Rating: -1
RE: Interesting Analogy
By Lifted on 9/25/11, Rating: 0
RE: Interesting Analogy
By Omega215D on 9/25/2011 3:59:21 AM , Rating: 4
What the hell are you rambling about?

If you've noticed that the author is no Jason Mick but rather Brandon Hill. Second, Jason is entitled to his opinion which also happens to be the opinions of many people on this site (who weren't washed into the Apple cult) with good reason.

There were articles questioning Google as well. Many of us aren't afraid to voice a concern or opinion when a company or product is causing concern.

Apple started this whole mess and as such should get a taste of their own medicine. They patented things that were pretty much in standard practice or a logical movement as technology progresses. Apple was also leading the way of blatantly false advertising in their Macs vs PC commercial (Macs are PCs as well) then went on to be smug about their so-called lack of problems and "high standards", to which having owned many of their products is not entirely the case. I'm not the only one as well. Countless others have experienced a specific set of issues with their mac products for differing models only to be swept under the rug by Apple then quietly given the go ahead to remedy said problems but not on a consistent basis.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Sungpooz on 9/25/2011 1:18:28 PM , Rating: 2
It's okay, we're used to em. :)


RE: Interesting Analogy
By macdevdude on 9/24/11, Rating: -1
RE: Interesting Analogy
By Camikazi on 9/24/2011 9:35:42 PM , Rating: 5
You realize Apple would need to get by Google, MS (they make A LOT of money on Android), HTC, Samsung, LG, hell even VIA and all the other people who back Android before it will be gone right? Android is not going anywhere anytime soon Apple does not have the power to do it.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By macdevdude on 9/24/11, Rating: -1
RE: Interesting Analogy
By Xcpus on 9/24/2011 10:56:59 PM , Rating: 5
Flip Phones? Sorry but Apple are not the first to introduce a touchscreen and not the first to introduce square shaped icons. So why would these manufacturers go back to making Flip phones?

You are irrational, emotional and appear to be ignorant of reality. Are you by chance an Apple fan? Err scratch that... it is self evident that you are.

Your opinion is therefore worthless.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By macdevdude on 9/24/11, Rating: -1
RE: Interesting Analogy
By bugnguts on 9/25/2011 12:20:37 AM , Rating: 2
All Samsung made lol you are the troll your name is ' mac dev dude'. Perhaps in the phone form factor this is all they made, but Samsung has been in the LCD business before Apple was getting its leg under itself again not to mention their memory and numerous other products. I should check but I do believe up until recently Samsung was making the panels for those nice and overpriced mac monitors.
Hmm most inventive. That is just idiocy. In the tech software I would rank MS and Google as more influential. Hardware well Intel, note Apple switched to their chips a while ago, Cisco, IBM and Samsung have contributed more.
I work as a chip fabrication field as a process engineer helping design tools that are used in semiconductor fabs around the world. Apple is a single midsize player.
Apple has innovated in MP3, Mobile Phone and tablet markets impressive but I can go indefinitely without Apple products not true with Simens(electrical grid), Cisco(communications) or MS/PC(for work purposes).


RE: Interesting Analogy
By kingmotley on 9/25/11, Rating: -1
RE: Interesting Analogy
By dark matter on 9/25/2011 5:07:02 AM , Rating: 5
Market Cap is meaningless.

Which do you think the world can do without?

Exxons Oil?

Or Apples toys?


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Pirks on 9/26/2011 11:45:07 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Market Cap is meaningless
I hope retrospooty will finally get this. Will you retro? ;)


RE: Interesting Analogy
By retrospooty on 9/26/2011 12:38:37 PM , Rating: 2
You are a freegin idiot Pirks.

1. You are out of context here. This is NOT a RIM thread.
2. In this context Apple has a huge market cap and is being compared as a huge company, which they are not (what they are is highly profitable).
3. At the time we went back and forth a few weeks ago, RIM's stock went to 1/5th it's previous value (btw its now at 1/7th its previous value. If Apple were to fall to 1/7th its current value it WOULD be a problem would not be meaningless. It would not be the problem, it would be the result of a problem. As in RIM's case, the problem is not the low value, the low value is one of many telling factors of bad decisions and slow reactions.

Any other doofus comments you have?


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Pirks on 9/27/2011 12:09:24 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
This is NOT a RIM thread
So what? I can pwn your anti-RIM trolling everywhere I want to. Deal with that :P
quote:
If Apple were to fall to 1/7th its current value it WOULD be a problem would not be meaningless
I'll use this quote of yours every time another anti-Apple troll tries to post some bullshit like "market cap doesn't matter", I guess you don't mind :)


RE: Interesting Analogy
By retrospooty on 9/27/2011 3:14:07 PM , Rating: 1
"So what? I can pwn your anti-RIM trolling everywhere I want to. Deal with that :P"


Okeedokee, but I didnt say anything about RIM here. Its an Apple/Samsung thread.

"I'll use this quote of yours every time another anti-Apple troll tries to post some bullshit like "market cap doesn't matter"

OK, if you feel the need to, but again, you are slipping into the less and less coherent state. If Apple stock fell to 1/7th its current value, it would be the result of major problems. Now here is the tricky part, so try to read slowly so you can understand ok?

Stock price is NOT a cause, its the effect. Apple products are NOT selling because the stock is high, the stock is high because the products are selling and the future pipeline is expected to as well with a good profit margin.

Now RIM's outlook isnt so good. They are not expected to sell and the market shows it. Do you understand the difference between cause and effect? Whatever, I dont even care. If you want to believe all is rosy and fine at RIM with their 7x stock plunge in the past 3 years and deny the reasons behind it then go right ahead... Just try to keep it in a RIM thread. Again, we were all discussing Apple, Samsung and Verizon in this Apple, Samsung and Verizon thread under this Apple, Samsung and Verizon article.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Pirks on 9/27/2011 5:44:38 PM , Rating: 2
I know stock reflects market perception, I was just protesting against following the herd. If the market follows only the bad news about RIM and ignores all the good news - why we DT readers should follow the sheep?

If you are in the herd of consumers rushing out to buy new iPhone 5 - will you follow the sheep and stay in line with them all night?

No, you won't.

So why you then follow the herd about RIM? Why double standards? Why following only the RIM herd and NOT following the Apple herd huh?


RE: Interesting Analogy
By retrospooty on 9/27/2011 8:30:59 PM , Rating: 2
"So why you then follow the herd about RIM? Why double standards? Why following only the RIM herd"

I am not following any herd, I just don't think RIM has any phones that are compelling enough for me want to buy. On the enterprise end, their pay per user model doesnt hold any weight against the same exact thing for free model that ALL OTHER SMARTPHONES FROM ALL OTHER MAKERS SUPPORT. Sorry for the all caps, but you don't seem to get the significance of that. Its not all sheep. In the case of RIM, the critics actually have valid points.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Pirks on 9/28/2011 10:28:18 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
their pay per user model doesnt hold any weight against the same exact thing for free model that ALL OTHER SMARTPHONES FROM ALL OTHER MAKERS SUPPORT
I've already shown you the link that proves superiority of RIM's model and explains what advantages it holds and why enterprise users go for it. I will keep sending that link to you until you UNDERSTAND what is written in there. Sorry for the all caps, but you don't seem to get the significance of that.

On the enterprise end, the pay per user model of MS Windows doesn't hold any weight against the same exact thing for free model that ALL OTHER LINUX VENDORS SUPPORT. Sorry for the all caps, but you don't seem to get the significance of that either.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By retrospooty on 9/28/2011 12:56:26 PM , Rating: 2
"I've already shown you the link that proves FORMER superiority of RIM's model and explains what advantages it holds and why enterprise users WENT for it.
"

There, I fixed that for you. As is clear, RIM's marketshare is dropping, because they have no comsumer advantages, and the enterprise customers are leaving the pay per user model for a cheaper, less problematic model that does the exact same thing without RIM's software and servers's in the way - its called Exchange Active Sync - look into it.

As it is STILL today, you cannot buy a RIM phone and get EAS email, calendar and contact sync and that is a problem (I mean EAS, not OWA, not POP and IMAP, EAS is the industry standard and is free with exchange CAL's). It's not that RIM's phones arent capable, they certainly are capable and have always been, it's that RIM decided not to support EAS to try and FORCE IT depts to stay on BES (the $20 per user per month model that IT depts are abandoning)

Whatever though, again, you are not here to look at the reality of RIM's situation, you are here to try and convince people that its not a problem, like RIM's management is.

Good luck with that and your 7x dumping stock price, dwindling marketshare, obsolete pay per user service and boring tiny screen phones with poor apps.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Pirks on 9/28/2011 1:13:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I've already shown you the link that proves FORMER superiority of RIM's model
Did the mail delivery method for non-RIM phones change since then? No. Therefore you are lying about FORMER part. Nothing has changed, non-RIM email is delivered in the same way, just like a few years ago, no change there. No FORMER word is appropriate here because of this.

Try to lie again and I will catch you lying one more time. You like that? Seems so :)
quote:
tiny screen phones
Don't envy my Torch 9860 large 3.7" screen that's larger than the iPhone's one. If you keep envying like that you'll keep like a dumb clueless troll :P Is it what you want?
quote:
poor apps
Also, please note that being a fanatic of a gazillion of fart apps like you are is also considered to be a bad tone. Stop looking so dumb, stop worshipping those damn fart apps, will ya??

Or maybe you wanna worship the Android malware that's flooding those "open" Android crapphones? You're welcome! Go worship it, troll, if nothing else can clear your muddled mind


RE: Interesting Analogy
By retrospooty on 9/28/2011 1:39:54 PM , Rating: 2
"Did the mail delivery method for non-RIM phones change since then?"

Yes, you complete idiot it did!. RIM's email solution was better because it did a true push email. Back then, years ago, Exchange offered it, but mobile OS's didnt really recieve "push" email they simulated it with timed "pulls" thus the slightly worse battery performance. ALL modern smartphone OS's now pull. Anyhow the slight difference in battery drain on email is really irrelevant, becasue it wasnt a large issue before and doesn't exist at all anymore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_e-mail

"Don't envy my Torch 9860 large 3.7" screen"

I dont, how could I? This is RIM's largest screen to date and it is small compared to what else is out there. I have 4 inches on a Droid3, but there are a ton of 4.3 models out there, Dell even had a 5 inch model and there are other 5+ models coming from Samsung.

"a fanatic of a gazillion of fart apps like you"


I find this funny. You keep saying fart apps like you are jealous. I actually dont have any fart apps, but you would have to be blind and stupid to even imply that RIM has the apps that IOS and Android do. Oh, wait.... Nevermind.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Pirks on 9/28/2011 2:13:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_e-mail
Microsoft began offering real-time e-mail notification with Windows Mobile 2003 (sending SMS messages when new mail arrive), then replaced it with a simulated push experience (long polling) in 2007 with the release of Windows Mobile 5 under the name "Direct Push Technology". 'Direct Push' technology is an additional feature added to Microsoft Exchange 2003 with service pack 2 that adds messaging and security features. A phone device running Windows Mobile 5 is enabled to poll Exchange Server every 30 minutes. If new mail arrives in polling interval, it is instantly pulled using a subscriber's existing wireless phone account.

So Wikipedia still says MS uses old crappy pull mail instead of push.

You also decided to "ignore" the fact that BB OS is less data hungry as mentioned in http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2393287,00.as... ("Uses less data than other OSes") but I can see through you. Avoiding to mention BB OS strong points at any cost retro? Why so much hate huh? ;)
quote:
you would have to be blind and stupid to even imply that RIM has the FART apps that IOS and Android do
Fixed for you :P
quote:
I dont, how could I?
But you just lied about BB 3.7" screen being "tiny", how could you blatantly lie like that huh? :)))


RE: Interesting Analogy
By retrospooty on 9/28/2011 2:25:02 PM , Rating: 2
"Direct Push' technology is an additional feature added to Microsoft Exchange 2003 with service pack 2 that adds messaging and security features. A phone device running Windows Mobile 5 is enabled to poll Exchange Server every 30 minutes." ...
So Wikipedia still says MS uses old crappy pull mail instead of push.


You do realize that Windows Mobile5 is 2 gens old now right? It also has little to do with IOS and Android which own the market today. The point there is that MS offered push in Exchange2003 SP2, and all modern phone OS's support it. That was Rim's only advantage and now it doesnt exist.

Whatever... You keep on trying to convince people that RIM is doing great. Good luck with that and RIM' 7x dumping stock price in 3 years, dwindling marketshare, obsolete pay per user service and boring tiny screen phones with poor apps.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Pirks on 9/28/2011 2:43:58 PM , Rating: 2
You do realize that Exchange2003 SP2 doesn't have push, it has Direct Push AKA Long POLL technology right? The point there is that MS offered LONG POLL renamed as Direct "Push" in Exchange2003 SP2, and all modern phone OS's support it, and this is why BB is still pwning everyone else in data traffic and battery longevity metrics. That was one of RIM's advantages and it still exists, according to what Wiikipedia says about MS Exchange fake "push" stuff.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By retrospooty on 9/28/2011 2:50:49 PM , Rating: 2
MS's push model works great. Email uses almost no data at all anyhow unless there is an attachment, which is equal on both platforms. Your whole premise is moot. It's like , hey, would you rather have $1000 or $1000 and 2 cents.

Keep trying though... I am sure some day you will come up with a reason for people to go back to RIM.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Pirks on 9/28/2011 3:06:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
MS's push model works great
Yeah, and this is why WinMo market share in enterprise went down to zero while RIM enterprise marketshare went up, in some countries it's a virtual monopoly . But don't get the market realities to spoil your little cozy bubble retro :)))

Your funny babbling reminds me Linux fanatics who were babbling that their FREE Linux can do stuff just like PAID PER USER Windows can do hence Windows is doomed.

HA HA HA.

You keep babbling Linux style like that buddy. Everyone needs a good laugh.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By retrospooty on 9/28/2011 3:10:17 PM , Rating: 2
"MS's push model works great "

LOL, let me correct myself. MS Exchange's push model works great. I really don't know dip about Winmobile7. I know 5 and 6 were crap.

My point has nothing to do with Winmobile, its about Exchange's free EAS push model obsoleting Blackberries pay per user model, regardless of how MS has managed or mismanaged Winmobile.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Pirks on 9/28/2011 3:44:55 PM , Rating: 2
Linux's free use model obsoleting MS pay per user model...

Uh oh.

Linux's FREE model works great. It's gonna kill Windows!

Oh wait... :)

Will you ever learn that FREE products pretty often are crap?

I guess you won't.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By retrospooty on 9/28/2011 3:53:57 PM , Rating: 2
Everytime you have no valid point, you bring in other companies or situations. Windows vs. Linux is not the same thing. MS Exchange is not free, nor are the CAL's, if you even know what a CAL is... Mobile push mail is already a built in part of exchange, so I should say it's no additional charge like RIM has. RIM's model has an additional charge, 2 additional potential failure points and adds no value to mobile mail vs the MS model. No value at all.

If you really want to bring in other companies and situations to compare, RIM compares best with Palm.

1. A great product and innovation in its day. Check
2. Owned its market until the rest of the world caught up. Check
3. Could not innovate quickly as the world passed them by. Check
4. Sat in denial as the rest of the industry came out with equal, then better , then far better products. Check.
5. After much time had passed and marketshare dwindled, they finally came out with a decent offering (WebOS, OS7). Check.

Now RIM still has time and money to avoid becoming Palm, but they need to do a hell of a lot better than they are today.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Pirks on 9/28/2011 4:37:47 PM , Rating: 2
Well, if MS Exchange were so great then it'd have a huge market share by now and RIM had nothing. Looks like RIM's enterprise stronghold is there for a reason. It's not like IT folks are idiots and you are the smart aleck is it?

Anyway, wake me up when MS phones have any decent marketshare among enterprise wireless crowd.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By retrospooty on 9/28/2011 6:50:51 PM , Rating: 2
"Well, if MS Exchange were so great then it'd have a huge market share by now"

It does. It has like 99% of the enterprise mail market. The small portion being Lotus. As for the mobile portion, it has all of it. Dont forget, all those companies that pay $20 per user for thier BB's also paid for Exchange and the CAL's for the users.

"It's not like IT folks are idiots and you are the smart aleck is it"

No, but IT is slow to react and change when new stuff comes out, and they ARE reacting, THAT is the freeging stock trending you are seeing now. More and more companies are going exchange only. RIM is huge today because so many companies adopted BB when it was the only game in town. That is the one hit wonder wave they have ridden for a decade. IT depts are catching on


"Anyway, wake me up when MS phones have any decent marketshare among enterprise wireless crowd. "


I dont see that happening, and never implied that they did. My only positive mention of MS here was regarding exchange.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Pirks on 9/29/2011 10:33:34 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
More and more companies are going exchange only
And this is why RIM subscriber numbers are going up every quarter? Right retro? Or did I just catch you lying again?


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Omega215D on 9/25/2011 8:44:00 AM , Rating: 2
Are you that dense? Samsung deals in memory and display production. Most products today have something made by samsung or a partner of samsung. The Apple A4 is manufactured by Samsung. Cisco and IBM have done a lot more for commercial markets than on the consumer side but that doesn't mean they're not inventive. IBM is testing and developing new solid state memory architecture that can improve upon what we have today, but it's not surprising that you haven't heard of it.

You seem to have blinders on. Just focusing on the exterior and in a narrow range at that.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/...


RE: Interesting Analogy
By tng on 9/25/2011 11:04:50 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Apple did quite a bit in the past 10 years for the average consumer, more than I could say for say cisco, ibm, samsung (really?!? WTF have they done?)
Wow, really? Here is where you have to pay attention. Allot of these companies don't have new flashy crap that shows up in a section of Best Buy.

Cisco? For one thing I have used their VoiP systems and phones in about 5 different countries. I am sure that they have even more stuff out there besides just commercial routers and switches that I am familiar with.

IBM....I have some equipment that has specific IC's in them from IBM. Again I am sure that there is more out there than just that. Comparing IBM to Apple is just insane, IBM is a very innovative company, IBM patents are very specific and not just some vague words on paper.

Samsung, well OK, I will say that in my own personal experience I have seen them ripoff designs direct and I am not saying that is the fact here, but they have a huge presence out there. MS and Google are both more interesting than Apple anyday and offer better products as well.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By StevoLincolnite on 9/24/2011 10:57:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
ha nice try tr0ll!


Pot. Meet Kettle.

For starters... Apple steals/copies ideas from the competition. (The Tablet had been around for a decade before Apple came along.)
Heck, your lord savior Steve Jobs/Picasso stated as such... So if Apple can do it and openly admit to it. Surely it's competition can to?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

Steve Jobs: "Good artists copy great artists steal."


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Omega215D on 9/25/2011 4:07:49 AM , Rating: 2
Come to think of it my HTC Thunderbolt does look like an iPhone! /S

(Avoiding replying to devdude because he's at -1)

Yes, how is it that the Cult of Apple not see this quote of Jobs stating that he's not ashamed of stealing ideas.

Then Apple goes on to get products, that dare to touch Apple in any way, banned in various countries on dubious claims. Dubious considering that Apple weren't the first ones to create or implement said piece tech. They used brand image to sell their products. Their products tend to be nice but so are other manufacturers stuff.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By mostyle on 9/25/2011 4:58:22 AM , Rating: 2
...Do as I say, not as I do.

:)


RE: Interesting Analogy
By augiem on 9/25/2011 2:42:04 PM , Rating: 2
Everyone should listen to the whole vid. The next line is "And... we have, you know, always been shameless about stealing great ideas." That's far more telling than just re-quoting Picasso.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By bugnguts on 9/24/11, Rating: -1
RE: Interesting Analogy
By macdevdude on 9/25/11, Rating: -1
RE: Interesting Analogy
By JohnWPB on 9/25/2011 2:42:20 PM , Rating: 2
macdevdude, it is quite evident that no one here really cares about your stupid Apple comments.

You keep bringing up Anand. Why don't you go back there and j*ck off for a while.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By MechanicalTechie on 9/25/2011 8:52:06 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah dont bother... he is oblivious finanically dependent on Apple so he's just trying to defend(and very poorly I might add) his position. The guy is pathetic


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Scootie on 9/25/2011 2:52:58 AM , Rating: 1
I dont remember learning at history lessons in school anything about nazis being thiefs, many other things yes but not thief or stealers of foreign technologies.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By dark matter on 9/25/11, Rating: 0
RE: Interesting Analogy
By michael67 on 9/24/11, Rating: 0
RE: Interesting Analogy
By macdevdude on 9/24/11, Rating: -1
RE: Interesting Analogy
By michael67 on 9/25/2011 4:57:18 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Its pure desperation. Samsung can't win fighting fair so they're trying to use abuse frand patents.

Ware do get it, that Samsung is desperate ?

To me it looks like these lawsuits are more a act of desperation from Apples sides, and Samsung is just lashing back in anger.

And Apple should have gone to Samsung mouths earlier and taken license on those FRAND patents, because they new the ware not paying royalties, or at least should have known.

quote:
Once Samsung is banned in the us its game ova for the c0pycat.

In what way is Samsung a copycat?
Tablets bin used in scions fiction for years, Star trek TNG, 1968s "2001 a space odyssey", etc etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vEDmNh-_4Q&

And in how many ways can you make a smart phone or a tablet, just because you make the first commercial accepted one dose not mean everyone else is copying you.
If anyone is copying then its also Apple.

That a old fart of a Judge in Germany did not know how to implement the law right (as many quoted specialist on German law on German tech sites said that the Judge implemented the law wrong), it dose not mean Apple is right, as the Judge in Holland laughed Apple out of court with its design pattens that ware mouths to general, and only the patent that described a real way of doing something got honored.

Don't talk if only BS coming out, you apparently dont even have a fraking clue where you are talking about.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Chadder007 on 9/25/2011 12:30:51 AM , Rating: 4
I was honestly considering the next iPhone for my Droid X's replacement. Apple has made quite a bad impression with me in the past few months and I no longer will be doing so. I will be looking into the latest Windows 7 phones when they come about now.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By DJ Brandon on 9/25/2011 10:58:51 AM , Rating: 2
Perfectly said!


RE: Interesting Analogy
By mxnerd on 9/26/2011 3:33:00 AM , Rating: 2
Remember Beta vs VHS?


RE: Interesting Analogy
By damianrobertjones on 9/26/2011 4:21:52 AM , Rating: 2
The generic standard consumer couldn't care less about this stuff as:

a: They'll never get to find out
b: Don't care as their latest Apple product is shiny
c: Will overlook common sense just to fit in

Oh well.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By messyunkempt on 9/26/2011 7:14:04 AM , Rating: 2
Thats got to be a godwins law world record. First post! I fully agree though, theyre making many enemies and very few friends in quite a short space of time. I really cant see this strategy ending up well for them in the long run...


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Darksurf on 9/26/2011 11:14:16 AM , Rating: 2
OMG, now that you mention it. I see what you're talking about! thank you for the enlightenment ;)

I wouldn't have ever thought to correlate them with each other, but your point is hard to argue and stands solid!

Lets hope more people see this and can realize that apple has just sealed their fate!


RE: Interesting Analogy
By PrezWeezy on 9/26/2011 1:46:30 PM , Rating: 3
Jason, you are writing this far too emotionally. This is the exact reason most "average" people (anyone without a law degree) don't stand a chance in a lawsuit. The way the system works:
Someone applies for a patent.
The PTO verifies it does not infringe upon any other patent previously issued.
The applying party recieves the exclusive rights to their patent (in this case, the shape and design of the iPad).

Now when Samsung decides to make a tablet which is similar and Apple sues them, the only thing the Judge can decide is does it or does it not infringe upon the patent issued to Apple. The German judge believed it did. It is not, however, up to them to decide if the patent itself is valid. In fact, they are specifically supposed to ignore their own feelings on whether or not the patent is valid. Because that is not their place. It is then up to a different judge and court filing to determine validity.

So you are getting so upset about the judge giving Apple exclusive rights to make tablets yet completely ignoring the way the court system works. Samsung is probably already filing to invalidate Apple's patent and has a relatively good chance of winning, in my opinion, if they can prove that saying "minimalistic" is not specific enough to patent. But constantly droning about how the Germans are giving Apple a "court enforced monopoly" is simply getting too worked up over a ruling. That judge made the best decision they could with the information they had (and I would completely a totally believe they had both devices; it would be insane to issue a ruling without having the actual devices in front of you), and with the assumption that Apple has a valid patent.

I do agree, however, that this will backfire. But, then again, Apple has one department that in their company that I think far exceeds any other company in the entire world: the Legal Department. Their lawyers are able to get all kinds of things done I never would have thought possible. So we shall see.


RE: Interesting Analogy
By Netscorer on 9/26/2011 7:47:15 PM , Rating: 2
This is the lamest analogy I've ever seen.


So basically what Verizon is saying...
By neothe0ne on 9/24/2011 7:32:27 PM , Rating: 5
...is that Apple is anti-America?




By amanojaku on 9/24/2011 8:19:23 PM , Rating: 5
Apple doesn't believe in freedom, choice or truth. So, yes, anti-America, if you're comparing ideals. Pro-America, if you're comparing reality.


RE: So basically what Verizon is saying...
By Lord 666 on 9/24/2011 10:12:36 PM , Rating: 1
that VZW is in bed with an Android. Never seen a company agressively push any one platform as much as Android. Maybe its the insanely fast planned obsolescence of handsets, but there is nothing limiting LTE to any one handset manufacturer.


RE: So basically what Verizon is saying...
By seamonkey79 on 9/24/2011 11:18:02 PM , Rating: 4
There is when the majority of Apple phones on Verizon's network will remain 3G even after they come out with a replacement 4G iPhone...

The fact that Apple does not have a LTE phone available is enough for Verizon to very validly complain that Apple blocking the number one handset manufacturer for Verizon's network from producing 4G phones as detrimental to their 4G plans.


By Lord 666 on 9/26/2011 9:30:45 AM , Rating: 2
By kingmotley on 9/25/2011 4:19:24 AM , Rating: 2
It's important to Verizon because their android sets are more profitable for them since they are paying nothing for them (or at least less than the alternatives).


2011
By Kejan on 9/24/2011 6:59:55 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Verizon's LTE network launched in December 2011
having been launched in the future it sure is awesome that it beats a network launched earlier ;)




RE: 2011
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 9/24/2011 7:11:35 PM , Rating: 2
It was fixed a few seconds before your post, thanks to a kind email ;)


QOTD....
By croc on 9/25/2011 4:55:47 PM , Rating: 2
"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs

Think about it....

That's all.




its guy love....
By tekzor on 9/25/2011 11:03:02 PM , Rating: 2
between two guys....




By Roffles on 9/27/2011 3:14:01 PM , Rating: 2
Being a major parts supplier to Apple, it seems obvious to me that Samsung knows what it needs to know in order to trump the iPhone5's specs. So to me at least, there's no doubt in my mind that the Nexus Prime is going to be the better phone and thus all the lawsuits to slow Samsung down.

I mean, what's a 720px1268 "Super AMOLED HD" display capable of displaying content at LTE speeds going to do for Verizon's 4G network? Verizon needs a new flagship LTE device for the holiday shopping season and it sounds like the iPhone5 won't be packing this important new technology.

I've had my Bionic for a few weeks now and there is just no way I would ever go back to a 3G device. It really does make a phone useful on a whole new level.




Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By ptmmac on 9/25/11, Rating: -1
By drycrust3 on 9/25/2011 4:00:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Samsung chose the wrong chump to steal from.

And who is "the wrong chump"? Apple? No! They both copied from the Elographics Corporation, the makers of the world's first computer with a touch screen.
http://www.elotouch.com/AboutElo/History/default.a...


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By dark matter on 9/25/2011 5:14:59 AM , Rating: 2
Hi Employee from Apple PR...

You might win the battle with Samsung, but in doing so you risk losing the war.

Apples actions are starting to piss people off. Nobody likes restrictions IMPOSED on them, even if they would only buy Apple products anyway.

If anything its BETTER that you have a choice, it makes you feel better that your choosing the best product.

But restrict my choice so I have no option, then go fuck yourself, I will do without.

I dont NEED an iPhone, nor do I NEED a tablet computer.

I think Apples market cap has go to their head.

I NEED Oil. So why Apple has a bigger market cap than EXXON is an aberration of the marketplace.


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Tony Swash on 9/25/11, Rating: -1
RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By retrospooty on 9/25/2011 8:37:23 AM , Rating: 2
Hey look. Here is an Apple article and there is Tony and he is still ignoring any postitive points about competing companies, and ignoring any negative points about Apple while he ignores any negative points about Apple, and ignores any positive points about Competing companies.

What are the odd's of that?


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Tony Swash on 9/25/11, Rating: -1
RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By retrospooty on 9/25/2011 11:36:29 AM , Rating: 2
You didn't really say much in your post to agree or disagree with...

"Almost nobody cares about that stuff. Really."

Agreed most consumers dont, but techies do, techies who spread thier opionions to those who ask. Not enough to break Apple, but Apple does need to be careful who they piss off in the corporate world. They don't need enemies. Most of their largest suppliers supply more and profit more to thier Android business, what with Android outselling Apple 5 to 2 and climbing, not to mention Verizon is one of their largest customers. Dont forget, in the US, they sell to ATT and Verizon, not to end users.

I do agree that Apple will prolly have huge sales next quarter, that's not really in question. Alot of people like thier products with good reason.

Here is my point which I always post to you and you never address... You are "still ignoring any postitive points about competing companies, and ignoring any negative points about Apple while he ignores any negative points about Apple, and ignores any positive points about Competing companies."

That is the definition of a fanboy and a Troll...

Get some perspective man, Apple is jsut a company out to make money. Good for them. What is your agenda?


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Tony Swash on 9/26/11, Rating: -1
RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By retrospooty on 9/26/2011 8:46:48 AM , Rating: 2
"but surely that is what loads of people do on this forum when Apple is relentlessly attacked and critiqued with no sense of balance"

But... that's not when you jump in. You jump in when an article is posted.

It may be true some users here are anti-apple and doen't like what they do for Apple/Job's douchbaggy attitude, but that doesnt make you doing the same thing any better. In fact, the very thought that you realize that is what they do and you are doing it too makes you even worse.


By Pirks on 9/26/2011 12:53:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But... that's not when you jump in. You jump in when an article is posted.
This is logical and expected. Tony usually jumps in after the anti-Apple trolls crawl out of their caves. What would you expect from him otherwise? He's predictable. Anti-Apple trolls post some nonsense then Tony jumps in and pwns 'em. Why not? ;)


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Pirks on 9/26/2011 12:46:03 PM , Rating: 2
retrospooty and JM are "still ignoring any postitive points about RIM, and ignoring any negative points about RIM's competitors"

That is the definition of a fanboy and a Troll...


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/26/2011 8:07:24 PM , Rating: 2
You = The definition of Fanboy Troll


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Pirks on 9/27/2011 11:59:28 AM , Rating: 2
Suck it off cheezy clown :)))


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/27/2011 4:08:42 PM , Rating: 2
Not gay, unlike you. No sucking going on here on my end. I am pretty sure you suck something everyday.


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Pirks on 9/27/2011 5:13:52 PM , Rating: 2
quiet clown or your cork's gonna pop again :)))


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/30/2011 10:45:45 AM , Rating: 2
Such a clever response coming from a troll.....


By Pirks on 9/30/2011 12:37:07 PM , Rating: 2
look in the mirror, clown


By retrospooty on 9/27/2011 10:01:21 AM , Rating: 2
"That is the definition of a fanboy and a Troll..."

I love it... I just totally pwned you in 2 other threads in this very article, so you post here, again out of topic range.

This is NOT a RIM article... but then again, being totally pwned and not having any decent response to the other 2 leaves you with little choice.


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Pirks on 9/26/2011 12:35:55 PM , Rating: 2
Hey look. Here is a RIM article and there is retrospooty and JM and they are still ignoring any postitive points about RIM, and ignoring any negative points about RIM's competitors.

What are the odd's of that?


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/27/2011 4:06:44 PM , Rating: 2
Hey, look, it's an article about Apple, Verizon and Samsung. What are the odds of you being an idiot? 100 percent odds.


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Pirks on 9/27/2011 5:19:35 PM , Rating: 2
if you weren't a dumb clown you'd understand the context about RIM, retro and JM


RE: Apples lawsuits and corporate image.
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/30/2011 10:48:49 AM , Rating: 2
Oh right, the article is still about Verizon/Apple/Samsung. As for being dumb, well, you really should look in the mirror, you portray dumb each and everyday with your idiotic posts.


By Pirks on 9/30/2011 1:15:25 PM , Rating: 2
your empty posts don't even have stupidity in them, they are THAT empty


By MechanicalTechie on 9/25/2011 11:16:55 PM , Rating: 2
Well said!!

My hat goes off to you sir :)


By Camikazi on 9/25/2011 1:30:31 PM , Rating: 2
I still don't understand the Icon thing, most of those icons are either used before, or just don't look alike at all. Gears for Settings OMG seriously? Gears have been used to indicate Settings YEARS before Apple. The messaging icons looks nothing alike, the photo icons look nothing alike, the notepad icons look kind of similar but I have an actual notepad here that LOOKS JUST LIKE THAT, seems like Apple was copying a real life item there. The music one, I know I have seen before just can't remember where.


What this is really about
By Tony Swash on 9/25/11, Rating: -1
RE: What this is really about
By retrospooty on 9/25/2011 8:40:53 AM , Rating: 2
This is true with regards to the carriers. They only get involved it it helps them...

But that doesn't take away from the fact that Apple with it's sue first to advance their own business interest mentality is wrong here. I hope they get nailed.

Apple does a great job with making and marketing products that enough people want and want enough to pay thier high prices. They are making money in buckets lately. They dont need to be sue-happy on top of that.


RE: What this is really about
By Pirks on 9/26/2011 1:00:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They dont need to be sue-happy on top of that
No, they need to be, otherwise their successfull business will be ruined by copycats. The sooner Apple brings down crappy Google and Samsung Android powered iPhone clones, the sooner the ORIGINAL solutions from RIM and MS will flourish, and the better the consumer will be. We don't need copycats, we need _original_ alternatives. I hope RIM and MS will eventually outgrow Android clony crap and market will get three pretty big and ORIGINAL players who don't copy excessively from each other - Apple, RIM and MS.


RE: What this is really about
By retrospooty on 9/26/2011 1:33:25 PM , Rating: 2
"crappy Google and Samsung Android powered iPhone clones, the sooner the ORIGINAL solutions from RIM and MS will flourish"

Wow, you are just full of yourself today arent you. If you are going to say that, then Apple, MS and RIM all need to get out of the way because they all copied Palm's Treo. Not that I am suggesting that, but of you want to use the word "ORIGINAL" like its meaningful, then go with it.

Better plan - How about we let the phone makers make phones and let the consumers decide which one they want to buy based on their own personal wants and needs.


RE: What this is really about
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/26/2011 8:04:44 PM , Rating: 2
Today? More like everyday.


RE: What this is really about
By Pirks on 9/27/2011 12:05:07 PM , Rating: 2
yeah more like cheezy clown sucks it off everyday :))) good point!


RE: What this is really about
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/27/2011 3:59:03 PM , Rating: 2
No, I am not gay, unlike you, sorry to burst your bubble.


RE: What this is really about
By Pirks on 9/27/2011 5:23:48 PM , Rating: 2
you think being sad clown like yourself is any better? think again!


RE: What this is really about
By Pirks on 9/27/2011 12:17:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
How about we let the phone makers make phones and let the consumers decide which one they want to buy based on their own personal wants and needs
Consumers are all for cheapo copycats, hence no one will allow them to decide. RIM sued Samsung for blatant copying, Apple sued them too - copycats will be dealt with by courts, not by consumers.

Grow up retro, and maybe THEN you'll be able to understand what consumers should decide and what they should not.


RE: What this is really about
By retrospooty on 9/27/2011 3:02:53 PM , Rating: 2
So then you are saying that Apple, RIM, Samsung, and MS should all not be allowed to sell any phones because they ALL copied Treo?

You are right, I need to grow up I guess.


RE: What this is really about
By Pirks on 9/27/2011 5:40:05 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah you need to grow up... until the moment the German court proves you right and me wrong.

So far it proved you wrong.

So yeah, keep growing up for now :P


RE: What this is really about
By FITCamaro on 9/25/2011 7:45:58 PM , Rating: 2
Apple is the biggest threat to carriers power by selling devices on said carriers? What retarded logic is this?


RE: What this is really about
By Tony Swash on 9/25/11, Rating: -1
RE: What this is really about
By FITCamaro on 9/26/11, Rating: 0
RE: What this is really about
By foolsgambit11 on 9/25/2011 9:18:28 PM , Rating: 2
Were that true, Apple would have sold the phone unlocked. It only has done so in markets where the law requires it. Apple is quite comfortable in using the power of the carriers for its own profits. Of course, in the US, with multiple cellular systems and frequency bands, it's difficult to make an unlocked device that is truly carrier independent. So I don't fault Apple too much for sticking to one carrier for so long.

As for Google, whenever they compete directly with Apple's iPhone (i.e., actually develop a phone, not just an OS), they produce unlocked 'stock' devices - a step above Apple's iPhone as far as challenging carriers goes. But Google only rarely makes phones (I have their Nexus S, for instance). Usually they only make the OS. Then most of the rebranding/customization is done by the handset maker, not by the carriers.

Really, neither company threatens the power of the carriers in any real way. Their "power", such as it is, comes from having built-out incompatible underlying technology. When you can't take your phone from one carrier to another anyway, there's not much reason to avoid getting locked into a contract. Especially since they don't charge you less when you bring your phone with you - even though the high prices are supposedly to subsidize the handset.

I think Congress should mandate that the cellular industry adopt a single standard (preferably the global standard) for the next generation (5G). Maybe government intervention will rub some people the wrong way, but when it comes to infrastructure, ensuring efficiency and compatibility are valid concerns of government, and need to be addressed.


"I'd be pissed too, but you didn't have to go all Minority Report on his ass!" -- Jon Stewart on police raiding Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's home














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki