Print 109 comment(s) - last by Cheesew1z69.. on Aug 6 at 3:36 PM

The Galaxy Tab 10.1 (right) is currently banned from sales in Australia, pending the result of Apple's lawsuit against Samsung. No reports of the iPad being banned have arrived yet.  (Source: Daily Mobile)

Apple CEO Steve Jobs has proudly admitted to "stealing" ideas from competitors, but argues that Android "steals" from his company's ideas and shouldn't be allowed to, legally.  (Source: Jim Wilson/The New York Times)
Company will repay Samsung for lost revenue if it loses the case

Apple, Inc. (AAPL) has scored a major victory in latest round of lawsuits [1][2] courtesy of a ban on Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd.'s (SEO:005930) Australian Android tablet sales.  

Google Inc.'s (GOOG) Android platform is outselling the iPhone 2 to 1 and is growing at a faster pace than Apple.  So Apple is now trying to stifle its competitor with lawsuits.  It is currently suing all three [1][2][3] of the world's largest Android handset makers.

This week, Samsung agreed to cease sales and advertising of its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia, pending the outcome of a suit Apple filed against it in Australian court.  The suit is one of many that Apple has filed against Samsung in international courts.  

Like the other suits, in this one Apple contends that Samsung "slavishly" worked to steal its intellectual property, including its patented iPad design -- a thin rectangular tablet with a glass screen and black bezel.  Apple also claims Samsung stole its touchscreen technology.  In all 10 of Apple's patents are cited as being infringed.

Steven Burley, a lawyer for Apple, says the ban on sales was necessary as Samsung made "announcements of an imminent launch of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 device ongoing since July 20."

So far Samsung has not made similar agreements in the North America, Europe, or Asia.  However, Apple is pursuing a preliminary injunction banning sales in these regions.

Samsung is countersuing Apple.  The company has one of the world's largest patent portfolios and holds more U.S. patents than Apple.  Thus some legal experts believe Apple may have picked an intellectual property fight with the wrong company.

Apple chief executive and co-founder, Steven P. Jobs has bragged about his mastery of stealing ideas from others, stating [video], "Picasso had a saying - 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas." 

Mr. Jobs contends Android handset makers like Samsung, HTC, and Motorola should not be allowed to "steal" the iPad and iPhone's copyrighted look and designs.  

Critics have contended that Apple's patents are so broad that they cover every smart phone and tablet in existence today, as well as non-mobile devices like personal computers.

Apple has agreed to pay Samsung unspecified damages for lost sales, if it loses the case.  It is unclear if this agreement would cover lost sales in the case of a "draw" -- a scenario, which could occur if both companies win their respective lawsuits, forcing a cross-licensing agreement. 

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: cool
By Dirk88 on 8/1/2011 6:48:06 PM , Rating: -1
Sorry, but I looked at all the benchmarks provided by CNET, Popular Mechanics and others. OS X is more efficient than Windows 7. It runs faster and does tasks faster than Windows 7 on the same hardware. Also, you are comparing XP to 7, not OS X to either version of Windows.

And I do think you are making things up. It is possible for some late XP systems to run 7. If you compare the required or recommended hardware for Windows 7, it requires more powerful hardware than XP. But if you are telling any XP user to upgrade to 7, you are really going to misinform some user, and they will waste their money buying Windows 7, when they should just buy a new machine, in my opinion, a Mac.
Straight from the arse's mouth:

XP minimum requirements:

Windows 7 minimum requirements:

You need a 1 ghz processor to run 7... XP will run on a 233 MHz processor.


RE: cool
By weskurtz0081 on 8/3/2011 9:00:57 AM , Rating: 1
Oh, I see, so you are saying if one is even the least bit faster than the other, then the slower one is complete junk... you don't sound like a fanboy AT ALL!!

And, sorry, but I am not making anything up, I can even go get the exact system specs if you like. I know the system requirements are higher than those of XP, but in the real world it runs very well on the exact same XP hardware, try it out for yourself. I know someone that just put Windows 7 on an old single core Dothan Inspiron with 1GB of memory, similar results. 7 runs very well, at least as good as XP did on that notebook. Wouldn't you agree, it's not about benchmarks but rather how fast it feels!

And, I never said that 7 would run on ALL XP era hardware, I specifically referred to a P4 in the first post, so no need to create a straw man. I don't think there ever was a P4 below 1GHz.

"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive

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