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 8:34:23 PM , Rating: -1
Dude, if you are a software engineer, you must do HTML and simple JavaScript.

Where do I begin? Macs run Windows faster than any other PC because there is more to performance than CPU and memory and the simplistic way you look at it. What about frontside bus speed, CPU cache, and other finer points of the hardware that aren't specs that Windorks masturbate over? My Mac Pro, and all Macs at that time, had a 1066 MHz frontside bus. Few windows machines had this at the time, and the ones that did were only 5% less expensive than the Mac. Now Macs have a faster FSB (1333 MHz), L3 cache, thunderbolt, and even faster hard drives. They put these in all models, even the Mini...

What a crap way you compare the hardware... "duh, they're all the same, the only difference is the Apple logo, duh..." No, there are important differences, and once you find a Windows PC that has the same specs as a Mac, the price difference is gone...

PC makers like to put forth very few specs, because if you think it has enough processing power and memory, you will buy it, even with the slow motherboard, slow RAM, small CPU cache, and slow drives... That was the essence of the Windows PC vs. Mac commercials... To mislead people that you get more RAM on a windows system that costs the same. Yeah, but it's slow RAM... The old stuff they  pulled out from the warehouse!

If you get a $1000 Mac and a $1000 PC, and install Windows on both, the Mac will perform better.

Your hardware comparison is ridiculous!!! If you have a 1066 MHz frontside bus (new macs are faster) you need special memory that runs at that speed. Also, there is quite a difference in disk drive speed, and many Macs have SDDs that are super fast, and come stock with the system.

The PCs I looked at (I was never going to run Windoze again, but was going to do Ubuntu) at the time cost a lot if I wanted a 1066 MHz frontside bus, a decent CPU cache and fast hard drives. At that point, just buy the Mac pro, and you get a way better case designed such that changing a hard drive is easier than changing my socks. I have never seen a better designed computer than the Mac Pro. PC makers have and will continue to try to rip off the design...

I think you are just pretending to be an engineer... Seriously, your analysis of the hardware is even worse than something a desktop support guy with a vocational education would do...

RE: cool
By karlostomy on 8/1/2011 9:19:23 PM , Rating: 2
@ dirks88

If you get a $1000 Mac and a $1000 PC, and install Windows on both, the Mac will perform better.

Did you seriously just write that?
You really are from another planet aren't you?

For $1000 I can get MUCH better components in a PC than the comparable $1000 MAC that is dictated to you by SJ.
In most cases, the PC will have at least a better graphics card, or more RAM, or a bigger screen, etc.. at the same price point.
That's a no brainer.

How then do you assert that a MAC/Windows PC with inferior hardware will perform better than Windows PC with better hardware?
Makes no sense.

In addition, a $1000 PC will already have Windows installed and incur no further cost.
However, on a $1000 Mac, you need to spend additional money on a copy of Windows, bringing the real cost of the $1000 Mac (with inferior hardware) to about $1200+.

To add insult to injury, when it comes time to upgrade the RAM or GPU, the MAC will give you fewer choices of hardware to do it with and a higher cost in doing so.
Many MACs have NO option of upgrading the GPU. wtf?

Try to think before you post, dirks88.

RE: cool
By Helbore on 8/2/2011 8:36:24 AM , Rating: 1
Well it is obvious you haven't bought a PC in a long time if you think this has any truth to it. It almost sounds like you are comparing a bottom-of-the-line Dell Vostro to a Mac Pro and saying "look the Mac has better hardware!" But then you make a real pig's ear of it and claim a $1000 Mac has better hardware in it than a $1000 PC.

It doesn't.

Also, its not just down to the hardware to make Windows run well. It is also the drivers and Apple are notorious for writing crappy Windows drivers. Windows does not run better on a Mac with identical or lesser hardware than a comparable PC. In many cases, it is far worse, thanks to Apple's shoody drivers (which I'm sure they do on purpose, purely to make OSX seem better on the Mac than Windows)

It's funny that you blame poor coding in Windows for its performance problems and say how OSX is more efficient, so needs lower hardware requirements (which still isn't a good explanation as to why a Mac is more expensive when containing cheaper hardware), but you then go on to say that the buggy, problematic OS can run just fine on Apple's lower system requirements, too.

You can't have it both ways. Either Windows runs slower than OSX on lower-end hardware, or Windows can run just as well as OSX on similar hardware.

"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion." -- Scientology founder L. Ron. Hubbard

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