backtop


Print 53 comment(s) - last by darkhawk1980.. on Aug 16 at 7:39 AM

Thou shalt not clone, says the legalese

It's common knowledge that when Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) briefly stepped in to save the train wreck that was Apple, Inc. (AAPL) in the mid-nineties, the pair cemented their bond with a deep cross-licensing pact which has been responsible for the relative peace between the pair in these hyper-litigious times.  During the copyright infringement trial being held at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California between Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930) and Apple, that licensing relationship was the topic of some questions, questions that raised interesting details.

Apple patent licensing/strategy director Boris Teksler is quoted by The Verge as testifying, "The Apple and Microsoft cross-license does cover the design patents. However, we took special prohibitions from both parties so there is what I term an 'anti-cloning' provision... so we couldn't copy each other's products. There's a clear acknowledgement that there's no copying."

The cross-licensing agreement covered both design (aesthetics) and utility (technology) patents worldwide.

As The Verge has a copy [PDF] of that 1997 arrangement it then highlighted the passage that Mr. Teksler was talking about:

clone product

In other words, Apple and Microsoft won't sue each other for individual features (e.g. swipe to unlockdisappearing scrollers, or bounce animations) or minor design details (e.g. a rectangular smartphone), but if either company feels the other is "slavishly copying" the entire comprehensive product, they could -- in theory, at least -- sue the other.

Is this interesting?  Certainly.

How does it affect the Samsung v. Apple case?  That is unclear.  Apple clearly claims that Samsung "cloned" its products.  
 
Apple iPhone
Apple claims Samsung "slavishly copied" its products. [Source: David Paul Morris/Getty Images]
 
But ultimately this testimony could be used against Apple if Samsung can establish that its smartphones/tablets are as different from the iPhone/iPad in design and user interface as Windows Phone 7 handsets and Windows tablets are from the iPhone/iPad.  Because if the level of differences is similar, and it was enough to constitute "slavishly copying"/cloning, the question would be why Apple isn't suing Microsoft as well.

Source: The Verge



Comments     Threshold


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

The cash infusion didn't save Apple
By TakinYourPoints on 8/14/2012 7:25:50 PM , Rating: 4
The 1997 cash infusion didn't save Apple, it was too small a figure made from diluting existing shares.

At the time Apple had $1.2 billion in cash and a $3 billion market cap. That following quarter they were already back in the black by reducing their product line from over a dozen computers to only four (consumer/professional desktop/laptop), and they further trimmed down operations by cutting out printers, PDAs, etc etc.

Lots of streamlining and layoffs.

The "cash infusion" by Microsoft was only $150 million in restricted stock that was created by diluting already existing AAPL shares. $150 million in funny money created out of thin air means little compared to the billions in hard assets that Apple had even in their beleaguered state.

What was actually important was Microsoft committing to continue developing software for the Mac (IE and Office), putting confidence back into the platform. That was WAY more important than the funny money marketing that is still parroted by uninformed people. In turn, Apple dropped lawsuits against Microsoft and entered cross-licensing agreements, important in the late-90s given how under the microscope by the DOJ they were.

So the "investment" wasn't a real investment given the nature of the stock and the puny figure, it was a way for both companies to save face.

It was basically simple easy-to-grasp marketing for the peons to latch onto. Its still working, apparently.




By Samus on 8/15/2012 1:23:25 AM , Rating: 3
Simply put, it's Microsoft being Microsoft

Throwing bits of cash everywhere and diversifying your investment portfolio is a financial standard all people should adopt, but unfortunately its something only mega-corporations seem to do, and we wonder why they are mega and want them to pay ridiculous taxes for being financially savvy.

On average, Americans save/invest less than 4% of their income. In Germany, people save/invest 10-25% of their income. Now compare the two national economies and I believe the point has been made.

Microsoft purchasing even a tiny percentage of Apple was neither a risk nor a disappointment.


Great....
By darkhawk1980 on 8/16/2012 7:39:25 AM , Rating: 2
Am I the only one who finds it rather humorous that Apple and a few various overzealous people that comment here make the claim that Samsung made their products to look like Apple's, and that people bought them thinking they were Apple products?

I mean, seriously, if that was the case, wouldn't there be a huge uprising by the people because everyone was buying 'fake' Apple products? There would be riots in the streets. People would be killing sales associates for selling them a Samsung product instead of an Apple product.

The truth is, that isn't the case. That really defeats much of the problem with this court case in my humble opinion.

The simple fact is that maybe they made it that color because it was aesthetically appealing? Even if they copied the color of the earbuds, icons, etc....who cares? That would be like Aquafina trademarking a clear container for holding water making it impossible for Fiji and other various vendors to sell water in a clear container. It's downright stupid.

The real problem here is that Apple enjoyed some huge success for a few years. Now they're playing second fiddle (again) and attempting the same crap they did in the 1990's, just with a different target. It's a sign that a company can't innovate their way out of a paper bag against competition. There is no imagination there anymore.

Just like everything else, history has a coy way of repeating itself over and over....




...
By wiz220 on 8/14/2012 2:40:50 PM , Rating: 1
I wonder what the threshold is, as far as evidence is concerned, for Samsung or other Android manufacturers to prove collusion. It really seems to me like Apple and Microsoft do these licensing deals with each other as a sort of gentlemen's agreement to split the world between them while working together to crush everyone else. Shouldn't this count as a cartel at some point? Maybe only if MS gains traction in the mobile space with the new tablets and phones being prepped for release?

I suppose it might be harder to prove since they're doing it by abusing the patent system as opposed to retail price fixing.




cut from the same cloth
By Nortel on 8/14/12, Rating: -1
RE: cut from the same cloth
By amanojaku on 8/14/2012 2:34:11 PM , Rating: 5
The HTC Titan, Samsung Focus and ZTE Tania look like iPhones. Actually, they look more like Samsung Galaxies, but Samsung isn't suing the other two.

As to the OS, you just can't get any more basic than an icon display. If Samsung should be sued, it's for being lazy (sarcasm). And there are clear differences in the icons:

App Store
iPhone - a stylized "A"
Galaxy - a briefcase with a robot

Calculator
iPhone - a closeup of buttons
Galaxy - a whole calculator

Calendar
iPhone - a closeup of the numeric day
Galaxy - a whole calendar showing the numeric day

Camera
iPhone - a closeup of the lens
Galaxy - a whole camera

Clock
iPhone - a whole analogue clock with 12 hours
Galaxy - a whole analogue clock with 4 hours (NESW)

Email
iPhone - an envelope
Galaxy - an envelope covered by a giant "@" symbol

Internet
iPhone - Safari's compass logo
Galaxy - a globe or something

Music
iPhone - the iTunes logo
Galaxy - a CD with a musical note ("stolen" from Windows!)

Notes
iPhone - a closeup of a sheet of paper or ledger
Galaxy - a whole memo pad, with a curled page

Phone
iPhone - a big, green button with a white phone logo
Galaxy - a big, green button with a white phone logo

Text
iPhone - a big, green button with "SMS" in a talk balloon
Galaxy - an open envelope with a paper message half-way out

So, Samsung "stole" the standard clock and phone icons. The rest are clearly different, and rendered differently. The iOS buttons look like 2D images painted onto a flat surface. The Samsung buttons look more 3-dimensional.

http://news.yahoo.com/photos/science-and-technolog...


RE: cut from the same cloth
By macdevdude on 8/14/12, Rating: -1
RE: cut from the same cloth
By Reclaimer77 on 8/14/2012 4:45:58 PM , Rating: 4
LMAO Apple didn't "develop" ANY technology for the iPhone. And coding iOS sure as shit didn't cost "billions".

It's Samsung's technology that represents billions in R&D, without which the iPhone could not exist.

quote:
C'mon Droidtards, tell me this pictures don't look alike:


Sure they look alike, because it's Photoshopped you idiot!


RE: cut from the same cloth
By macdevdude on 8/14/12, Rating: -1
RE: cut from the same cloth
By Pirks on 8/14/2012 6:14:05 PM , Rating: 2
Well, my Galaxy Note is way more expensive than a lot of your cheapo iJunk you worship, Apple zealot :P


RE: cut from the same cloth
By momorere on 8/14/2012 6:40:24 PM , Rating: 2
Tony, Tony, Tony. Just when I thought you had forgotten your login credentials for MacDevDude, you surprise me and login as this personae after so many failed posts. It's just more -1s that you are bound to receive but I'm sure you are totally aware of that.

Just incase you missed the link that someone posted on another thread, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFeC25BM9E0.
Perhaps you should take a quick look and try and learn a little something along the way.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By elleehswon on 8/14/2012 7:28:08 PM , Rating: 2
billions on ios development, but, apparently no development to mac os, apple tvm icloud, or any other technology.. nope, it's all iphone. lololol. keep eating paint chips, kid. Grownups' a talkin`.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By sigmatau on 8/14/2012 7:50:44 PM , Rating: 2
Wait... what? Did you really just post that link? With the article that is titled "Microsoft, Intel, Google outspend Apple on R&D" and with this in it:

"Apple is 18th on the list, spending $2.6 billion, behind other technology giants such as Microsoft, Intel, IBM, Cisco, Oracle, Qualcomm, Hewlett-Packard and Amazon.com. Apple's R&D spending as a percentage of its revenue of $127.8 billion was 2%."

Why do you make it so easy to be a fool?


RE: cut from the same cloth
By Cheesew1z69 on 8/14/2012 7:51:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The iPhone innovated, Google and Samsung just copied, with their half-@ssed crapdroids that are always crashing and dying and can't go four hours practically without running out of battery.
Yep, that's my my S3 never crashes, and battery lasts all day. LOLOLOLOL


RE: cut from the same cloth
By Cheesew1z69 on 8/14/2012 7:53:44 PM , Rating: 2
why*


RE: cut from the same cloth
By ihateu3 on 8/15/2012 9:47:41 AM , Rating: 1
Apple was a Chinese knock off of PC's forever!!! If you want to talk shapes, lets talk the "PC" tower!

Going on your philosophy, this seems fitting...

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc242/ihateu197...


RE: cut from the same cloth
By TakinYourPoints on 8/14/12, Rating: 0
RE: cut from the same cloth
By amanojaku on 8/14/2012 5:54:16 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Yea for being lazy and ripping off the iPhone and its technology that took billions to develop.
Billions? More like kajillions! I can make up facts, too.
quote:
C'mon Droidtards, tell me this pictures don't look alike:
They do. Most phones have a keypad that's three buttons wide, and four tall, in the following order: 1-3, 4-6, 7-9, *,0,#. For smartphones it's a rectangular screen (4:3 or 16:9) with an icon display. It's called basic functionality.
quote:
I haven't seen an Android that wasn't a wannabe iPhone. Google and co. wouldn't no innovation if it smacked them in the faces.
The iPhone's most distinguishing feature is its touchscreen display. Any smartphone without one is DOA, so, yeah, all smartphones will share this feature. However, many Android phones sport unique, if subjective, designs. Look at the Droid Razr, most of Acer's line, Sony's Experia, or Samsung's Intercept.

FYI, it's "know", not "no", you you GNU that, didn't yew?
quote:
I don't get it. if you all want an iPhone so badly, why don't you just buy one?

Hopefully all the crapdroids get sued off the market and that solves that problem for you. Then you can finally get that iPhone you've been secretly wanting all along.
I have a Motorola Razr. The V3 flip feature phone, not a smartphone. Data plans can kiss my battery cover. I'm an impartial commentator when it comes to smartphones, since I don't want any.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By Scootie on 8/15/2012 3:07:59 AM , Rating: 2
Why is every sheep fan forgeting that LG Prada was the real first smartphone with a full touchscreen?


RE: cut from the same cloth
By ihateu3 on 8/16/2012 12:47:47 AM , Rating: 2
And after that was also the HTC Touch still beating the iPhone to the market.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By Fritzr on 8/14/2012 7:26:30 PM , Rating: 3
Actually Apple & Galaxy "stole" the phone icon from the International Standard Signage set where it has been placed in the Public Domain.

If anyone other than the developers of these international standards is claiming that a Bell style telephone handset with or without a background, is their original, exclusive design then they are lying.

The authentic International Standard icons are available free for use by all icon designers. Expect some overlap when use is made of these designs or slight variations of the standard.
http://www.aiga.org/symbol-signs/
There is a .zip download of additional symbols

The Noun Project has an additional set of free-to-use icons including the postal envelope. Though if you want to avoid being sued by Apple you might use the Rural Mail Box icon to represent mail instead.
http://thenounproject.com/3/

It is amazing how many of these "unique and original" icons are actually available in (some very old) public collections.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By Varun on 8/14/2012 2:35:36 PM , Rating: 2
I love how the Photoshoped pic of the Samsung is always paraded around. I am pretty sure those are not the same size...

Other than that, I guess they look the same if you consider two black phones to be the same.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By Nortel on 8/14/12, Rating: -1
RE: cut from the same cloth
By CZroe on 8/14/2012 5:12:26 PM , Rating: 2
If it didn't make a difference, why did they photoshop it and modify the size? The problem is in the misrepresentation and not in the patentability of a certain size.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By Reclaimer77 on 8/14/2012 5:36:05 PM , Rating: 3
Do you know how shallow and vapid you sound? White ear buds, really?

Please do me a favor and list all the shapes and colors that exclusively belong to Apple. I have to see this.

And those icons? Wtf! We've all seen those icons as being common place since the World Wide Web came out. Hello? This would be like Sizzlers suing Golden Corral because the "guys" and "girls" bathroom icons look too much like the ones they use. How ridiculous can you get?


RE: cut from the same cloth
By TakinYourPoints on 8/14/12, Rating: 0
RE: cut from the same cloth
By Reclaimer77 on 8/14/2012 8:15:45 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Its a shame that less "vapid" companies like HTC are suffering by doing their own designs.


Oh is that right? Apple seems to have a different opinion...

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/02/apple-sues-htc-...

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&sou...


RE: cut from the same cloth
By TakinYourPoints on 8/14/12, Rating: 0
RE: cut from the same cloth
By Reclaimer77 on 8/14/2012 8:42:55 PM , Rating: 1
lol you guys are funny as shit. Nice contradicting yourself and straw man.

Samsung isn't "copying" Apple. The argument is dead and over with. Leave the dead horse where it lies and get a life.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By TakinYourPoints on 8/14/2012 8:51:41 PM , Rating: 2
Trade dress is the issue.

If Samsung was using stock Android they probably wouldn't have been sued by Apple, at least not as successfully as they are right now. Apple also likely wouldn't win in a lawsuit only about Samsung's Galaxy S copying the iPhone. Apple is suing and succeeding against Samsung in court specifically because of the combination of Samsung's smartphones/tablets combined with Samsung's TouchWiz UI infringing on the patents and trademarks of the iPhone/iPad and iOS.

Stock Android doesn't look like iOS. Neither do the UIs from other manufacturers. Samsung appears to have copied the iPhone from the chassis and UI right down to the packaging and accessories. This is why Apple appears to have a case against them.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By Reclaimer77 on 8/14/2012 8:58:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Trade dress is the issue.


Uh huh. And what will the issue be next week? Hows that "thermonuclear war" working out for you anyway?

Takin I get that you own Apple stock and feel compelled to make these arguments, but frankly you're wasting your time.

quote:
Samsung appears to have copied the iPhone from the chassis and UI right down to the packaging and accessories. This is why Apple appears to have a case against them.


Hmm it's still 2009 apparently!!! LOL you're ridiculous. That ship has sailed.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By TakinYourPoints on 8/15/2012 1:54:13 PM , Rating: 2
Nah, Samsung hadn't gotten around to copying the iPhone until 2010, that ship hadn't even been built yet.

As for owning stock, what does that have to do with anything? I stock in other companies too, and what I say about AAPL has no effect on the stock when I post on stupid little message boards. Like, zero effect.

I see an eastern company obviously ripping off an American one and I have to point it out, that's all.

Why do you hate America?


RE: cut from the same cloth
By theapparition on 8/14/2012 3:15:50 PM , Rating: 2
As I said below, go to phone-size.com.

It's awesome to compare real life pictures of phones. Very telling on how bad the linked picture misrepresents the facts.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By B3an on 8/14/2012 3:45:10 PM , Rating: 2
It's a highly photoshopped image posted by an iSheep. Just ignore.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By theapparition on 8/14/2012 3:08:36 PM , Rating: 2
You're reasonably intelligent, so let me do you a favor by telling you you're a complete idiot. What you think you know, you don't.

Now, stay with me. I'm not trying to bring you down, just sometimes people need reality checks. They are so blinded by religion that they start to see things that aren't there, like a blurry picture of the Virgin Mary in a grilled cheese sandwich.

The first picture you linked to is horribly photo-shopped. I suggest you go to an unbiased site like phone-size.com and really see the two phones side-by-side.

Let me tell you the differences:
Not the same physical size. One is taller by .5". Cut from the same cloth? Hardly.
Note the lack of visibility of the two soft buttons flanking the rectangular button.
Different locations of hardbuttons
Prominance of Samsung logo on front (not trying to disguise its origin)
Center mounted camera vs one tucked in the corner
Lack of apple logo on back of Samsung. Yes, this seems ridiculously obvious, but is extremely important for the trade dress argument.

Remember, Apple's argument is that Samsung is infringing because they look to similar and one could be mistaken for the other.

Anyone with an unbiased opinion can look at the two and tell them apart, that is if they are given photo-shopped pictures that intentionally try to mislead. I suspect you're smarter than that to intentionally deceive.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By sigmatau on 8/14/2012 7:52:43 PM , Rating: 2
My Galaxy S (work phone) looks nothing like a iphone 3GS that I owned 2 years ago.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By BifurcatedBoat on 8/14/2012 3:44:51 PM , Rating: 2
Samsung had phones that existed before the iPhone that are also almost identical in shape and look.

I'm not saying the iPhone is in fact was a copy of the earlier Samsung phones, but rather that the design is so obvious that it's like patenting the shape of a screwdriver.

Imagine if, at the beginning of the LCD monitor era, somebody acquired a design patent on the idea of a flat rectangular monitor screen with a thin rectangular bezel around it.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By TakinYourPoints on 8/14/2012 7:31:50 PM , Rating: 2
Its funny how much Samsungs started to look like iPhones in 2010, which is right around when their sales started to skyrocket. A 2009 Samsung Android smartphone looked nothing like an iPhone, and anything before then definitely didn't look like an iPhone. Nope, 2006 was when RIM took them to court for ripping off the Blackberry.

How little things change. Apparently a photocopier is the most important tool in the Samsung consumer R&D labs.

Perhaps HTC (who Apple singled out as NOT copying the iPhone) and Motorola would be in better shape if they resorted to copying Apple instead of doing their own unique designs.


RE: cut from the same cloth
By Cheesew1z69 on 8/14/2012 7:35:44 PM , Rating: 2
It's funny how most of their phones looked similar before the iphone....DERP...


RE: cut from the same cloth
By TakinYourPoints on 8/14/2012 7:39:59 PM , Rating: 2
I mean, look at this: http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/6/3224602/apple-sam...

Note the Blackjack the RIM sued them over, not just a similar design but also a similar name.

And the Galaxy Ace, really?
http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/6/3224602/apple-sam...

And people say that China is the land of knockoff design, amazing!


Where's the Samsung shaped dent in the universe?
By Tony Swash on 8/14/12, Rating: -1
By theapparition on 8/14/2012 3:13:59 PM , Rating: 2
Right on cue. I suppose you have an RSS feed with a filter for anything Apple.

Oh well, fanatics never need much reason for logic. BTW, posting links from pro-Apple sites pretty much mean nothing. Try an unbiased site. You'll have a harder time since your FOSS Patents' buddy was outed as a shill.


By Pirks on 8/14/2012 3:31:56 PM , Rating: 1
iDontCare if the shit Tony posts here comes from another Apple zealot or not, 'cause I noticed it myself a long time ago that Samesung makes Apple knockoffs, BUT this still didn't stop me from buying a Samesung clone, why? Because dog eaters don't JUST clone, they improve some parts too, like in my Galaxy Note they put a very nice very large and very convenient screen instead of a tiny joke of a screen that Tony and his fellow zealots "enjoy".

So it's not like Samesung's cloning is THAT bad, I think in the end they'll pay a billion or two in fines to Apple as a price for a really blatant copying of Apple in the early Galaxy S days, but they WILL stop cloning after all, they already clone less now and they try to distance themselves from Apple design as much as they deem reasonable. Healthy competition is coming people, with Google making decent OS from a crap it used to be and the same happening with WP and BB. In a year or two Samesung distances themselves from Apple far enough, and after paying some $$$ to Apple everybody will eventually forget about this brief period in smartphone history.


By sprockkets on 8/14/2012 3:42:42 PM , Rating: 2
How about a nice tall glass of STFU with your -1 rating?


By Tony Swash on 8/14/2012 7:21:20 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
How about a nice tall glass of STFU with your -1 rating?


Sprockkets - it's no good venting your anger at me like this in public - what I told privately I'm sticking too - you cannot come and live with me and be my sex slave. And that's definite :)


By sprockkets on 8/14/2012 8:14:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sprockkets - it's no good venting your anger at me like this in public


I'm sorry, you are gravely mistaken - I thoroughly enjoyed posting that. Especially since you now later in the day were reduced to -1.

quote:
what I told privately I'm sticking too - you cannot come and live with me and be my sex slave. And that's definite :)


Nice plurium interrogationum.

Troll harder next time.


By Reclaimer77 on 8/14/2012 3:45:16 PM , Rating: 3
It's irrelevant. The idea that you can "patent" a vague design and claim it as your own, is something that doesn't jive with rational unbiased people.

Apple's position is made doubly ridiculous when one considers that about 25% of the parts in an iPhone are directly from Samsung!

If Samsung made a direct clone, complete with Apple logo, you would have a point. By accusing Samsung of making the equivalent of a Chinese knock-off phone, your bias is evident.


By Tony Swash on 8/14/2012 7:41:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The idea that you can "patent" a vague design and claim it as your own, is something that doesn't jive with rational unbiased people.


What vague design has Apple actually patented and claimed as it's own?


RE: Where's the Samsung shaped dent in the universe?
By croc on 8/14/2012 7:40:16 PM , Rating: 1
Hey, Tony.

Calm Down.

A couple of simple questions.

Do you think that Apple copied Xerox or not?

Do you think that Apple has a history of copying other companies' products or not?

"We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."

Steve Jobs, 'Triumph of the Nerds', PBS, 1996.


By TakinYourPoints on 8/14/2012 7:49:16 PM , Rating: 2
I hate to follow up on a Swash comment, but compare the Xerox Star with the Mac UI and say if there's any carbon copying going on: http://youtu.be/Cn4vC80Pv6Q

I only saw the video two years ago and it is a really eye opening piece of history. The UIs are massively different. The basic groundwork was laid by Xerox but the execution of a modern GUI, things that we're all still using to this day, was all Apple.

One of the engineers who worked at both Xerox and Apple explains the differences very well: http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macin...

quote:
There is a significant difference between using the Mac and Smalltalk.

Smalltalk has no Finder, and no need for one, really. Drag-and-drop file manipulation came from the Mac group, along with many other unique concepts: resources and dual-fork files for storing layout and international information apart from code; definition procedures; drag-and-drop system extension and configuration; types and creators for files; direct manipulation editing of document, disk, and application names; redundant typed data for the clipboard; multiple views of the file system; desk accessories; and control panels, among others. The Lisa group invented some fundamental concepts as well: pull down menus, the imaging and windowing models based on QuickDraw, the clipboard, and cleanly internationalizable software.

Smalltalk had a three-button mouse and pop-up menus, in contrast to the Mac's menu bar and one-button mouse. Smalltalk didn't even have self-repairing windows - you had to click in them to get them to repaint, and programs couldn't draw into partially obscured windows. Bill Atkinson did not know this, so he invented regions as the basis of QuickDraw and the Window Manager so that he could quickly draw in covered windows and repaint portions of windows brought to the front. One Macintosh feature identical to a Smalltalk feature is selection-based modeless text editing with cut and paste, which was created by Larry Tesler for his Gypsy editor at PARC.

As you may be gathering, the difference between the Xerox system architectures and Macintosh architecture is huge; much bigger than the difference between the Mac and Windows. It's not surprising, since Microsoft saw quite a bit of the Macintosh design (API's,sample code, etc.) during the Mac's development from 1981 to 1984; the intention was to help them write applications for the Mac, and it also gave their system designers a template from which to design Windows. In contrast, the Mac and Lisa designers had to invent their own architectures. Of course, there were some ex- Xerox people in the Lisa and Mac groups, but the design point for these machines was so different that we didn't leverage our knowledge of the Xerox systems as much as some people think.


Watch the Xerox Star video above. Price aside, the differences between it and the Mac are massive. It is interesting how many of the modern GUI paradigms (drag & drop, drop down menus, clipboard, resizing and overlapping windows, etc) come from the Mac and not the Star.


By Tony Swash on 8/14/2012 7:50:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Do you think that Apple copied Xerox or not?


No. Apple did not copy Xerox.

Read " Dealers in Lightening: Xerox Parc and the dawn of the computer age" by Michael Hiltzik

quote:
Do you think that Apple has a history of copying other companies' products or not?


No. I cannot think of a single product that Apple has produced since Steve Jobs returned in 1997 that was a copy of another company's product. Some of the ugly beige boxes from Apple back in Apple's dark ages in the early 1990s looked like the best of the PC beige boxes.

quote:
"We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."

Steve Jobs, 'Triumph of the Nerds', PBS, 1996.


In response to the question "But how do you know what's the right direction?" Steve Jobs said:

"Ultimately it comes down to taste. It comes down to trying to to expose yourself to the best things humans have done and then try to bring those things in to what you are doing.

Picasso had a saying. He said good artists copy great artists steal. We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas. I think part of what made the Macintosh great was that the people working on it were musicians and poets and artists, and zoologists and historians who also happened to be the best computer scientists in the world. But if it hadn't been for computer science these people would have all been doing amazing things in life in other fields. And they brought with them to this effort [the Macintosh project] a very liberal arts attitude that we wanted to pull in the best we saw in these other fields into this field. I don't think you get that if you are very narrow."


So the oft used quote is about about bringing parts of other disciplines, from literature, art and culture, into computer science and product design.

What would, to use Jobs term, being very narrow mean in practice? Well it could mean endlessly dredging up a sentence from a Steve Jobs interview in 1995, taking it out of context, fetishising it, implying it is about one thing when it is about another, and then using it to prop up a delusional world view and a deliberately fallacious argument in defence of crass product cloners. That sort sort obtuse and pedantic behaviour leaves people without a shred of intellectual dignity and should be avoided like the plague.


By theapparition on 8/15/2012 11:19:48 AM , Rating: 1
If you kill someone, you'll be forever labeled a murderer.

If you post clearly biased posts on a news discussion site on ONLY one topic, you'll be labeled a fanboy troll. It's not me who has labeled you, but your own actions. Deal with it, or grow up. Pirks used to be the biggest troll here, but started to open his mind. Now sometimes posts factual and relevant information.

Opening your mind does not mean accepting the majority opinion to fit in, but it does mean that you give other topics their fair share of criticism and praise. You do neither. Only post on stories that praise Apple and criticize their competitors. Anyone who's unbiased must give props to the many innovations in Android or WinMo. But you've never had a single good thing to say about them. When the facts are clearly against Apple, you conveniently are absent......or religiously defend them. That's pretty much the definition of a zealot.

I, on the other hand, can look at the situation a little more unbiased and praise Apple for many of the things they do. I grew up using Apple products. But I don't like the closed ecosystem and the way I've been treated by Apple in the past and even now. It's my choice to not buy their products.

Getting back to your direct questions.

quote:
Do you think Samsung copied Apple or not?

I think apple took industry and market design cues and incorporated them into some of their designs, just as any good company would. Just as Apple took many design cues from existing handsets (full capacitive touchscreen, black rectangle, icon grid).

I don't believe Samsung's design was sufficiently similar to warrant confusion and infringe on both the design patent or trade dress.

quote:
Do you think Samsung has a history of copying other companies products or not.

Again my answer will be similar. Samsung and Apple both have taken design cues from current salable products and incorporated them. That is indisputable. The question is if those were protected by law.

I think a lot of people need to go back and look at Apple's history with the iPod. The scroll wheel was somewhat unique. Apples menu system powered most things, which was clunky as you always had to return home to go into different menus. But what brought about a completely different paradigm shift with the iPhone. Full touchscreen (already done) with a grid of icons (already done) sure seems like quite a departure. Seems to me, Apple copied a lot of existing designs into their new product. Natural evolution would have been to continue the iPod menu system, but they saw other designs and chose to integrate what the market was already going towards.


"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il














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