|
|
|
| Authored by: nuthead on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 03:18 PM EDT |
You might want to go back and do some fact checking. Your post
is too full of inaccuracies for me to correct in a timely
fashion. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 03:28 PM EDT |
And probably with other relatively well-informed tech observer. Not that we
necessarily love Samsung. But Apple is moving in the same direction for us as
the RIAA.
This rather expensive theater in the courts is a distinctive barrier to
innovation and runs completely opposite to the intended purposes of our IP
system, as stated in the US constitution: "To advance progress and the
useful arts"...[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 03:50 PM EDT |
One point is that Apple did not invent a touch phone. I'm
pretty sure my Palm Treo phone (with a touch screen) predated
the first iPhone by quite a bit.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 04:03 PM EDT |
This is not a beauty contest. The US opinion doesn't really matter. The
objectivity of the legal process do.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: betajet on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 04:14 PM EDT |
I think I know what you mean, but when I use the phrase "Samsung
Device", I normally think of DRAM, Flash, and processor chips, or else LCD
screens. You know, the devices that are in iPhones, iPads, and myriad other
consumer and industrial products. Engineers design using Samsung devices
because Samsung has an excellent reputation.
For Apple to sue its more important supplier is exceedingly bad manners, IMO.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Samsung Devices - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 04:44 PM EDT
- Samsung Devices - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 07:11 PM EDT
- Could be painful - Authored by: Wol on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 05:52 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: cjk fossman on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 04:15 PM EDT |
Samsung shouldn't think they're winning any
hearts and
minds in
the US yet if they're doing things that the court
is telling them not to
do.
If you are talking about this latest dustup, what court
order has Samsung violated? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 04:31 PM EDT |
Please stop unfounded generalization that all phones are now
like some iphone as they are not. CPU/GPU power with
adequate battery life have enabled the current generation of
'smart phones' with virtual keyboards (obviously since it
would be too heavy to have a keyboard as slider phones do).
Just in case you think Apple innovated with Siri, we now
have phones running by voice recognition which is getting
back to the really old phone days when apparently people had
to ask for an operator to connect you or computers like
Watson.
Ignoring what PJ has shown regarding the GPL, SCO ended up
as smoke and mirrors especially given the leaks that they
gave out. So much for the wonderful PR world, as some of
those reporters that fell for those leaks have paid a huge
price for not checking their facts.
Oracle may own some IP but it has given certain parts like
mysql to the world via open source licenses. We still have
to wait for the appeals to know if Oracle America can own
all APIs.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 04:40 PM EDT |
Oracle bought Java for the express purpose of monetizing it, that's
Oracle's motive for acquiring anything...
So at best Oracle had nothing to
lose if they lost the lawsuit,...
Yeah, actually they did have
something to lose. The billions the spent aquire Java to "monetize" it for one.
Also a tremendous amount of prestige. And they lost the ability to license
patents that Google got invalidated. So Oracle lost big time. (They are
appealing but I don't think anybody is giving them much of a chance to win.)
With this lawsuit, we're talking about the logical
progression.
There is no coincidence between Apple producing
a touch screen phone, and
suddenly everyone, Samsung,
Motorola, LG, HTC, RIM, Nokia, etc all coming out
with them...
The Apple newton, Palmpilot, and many stylus-based devices
predate the iPhone, but none of these devices where phones.
Many of RIM's
devices and early Android prototypes resemble the Treo(circa 2002) So Apple has
a valid point that only after the iPhone came out, all the competition changed
to multitouch rectangular phones...
The iPhone was not the first
touchscreen phone. I owned a Treo before the iPhone was introduced (as you say,
"circa 2002"). It's a touchscreen phone.
No Apple doesn't have a valid
point. Now only were rectangular, touchscreen phones introduced before the
iPhone was released, many were in development. Samsung had rectangular,
touchscreen phones in development, that looked nearly identical to the iPhone
that predated the iPhone's release. As, Samsung says, it was the next logical
progression and many companies were working on this form factor before the
iPhone was released. (By the way, Samsung still does produce other form factors
including a clam shell phone. So it's not like they saw iPhone said "that's it"
and abandoned everything else.
But unlike Oracle vs Google, or
SCO vs anyone, Apple starts
the game already winning the
PR...
Which is exactly Quinn's point -- thank you for
acknowledging it. Apple has been spreading a steady, putrid stream of FUD,
sounding like a robot while doing it. "Samsung slavishly copied the iPhone --
bip... Samsung slavishly copied the iPhone -- bip... Samsung slavishly copied
the iPhone -- bip... Samsung slavishly copied the iPhone -- bip..." Quinn is
making sure the public realizes that's not the truth.
The worst
thing that can happen from a Apple loss, is nothing. The worst that happens from
a Samgsung loss is that nearly all the Android devices are banned, and Samsung
takes a financial loss...
You really need to read about the case.
Apple is suing and is being sued. If Apple loses they will have to pay a
substantial amount of money to Samsung. Samsung owns patents that Apple
acknowledges they need to make the iPhone work -- real patents -- not BS, like
Apple's patent on "rectangular with rounded corners". Apple, potentially has a
lot to lose.
So Samsung shouldn't think they're winning any
hearts and
minds in the US yet if they're doing things that the court
is telling
them not to do.
Samsung is doing what they have to do and they are
doing it brilliantly. Samsung sells twice as many smartphones as Apple (and
they make between a fifth to a fourth of the components in iPhones and
iPads).
Samsung Galaxie products are well respected (they just sold over ten
million Galaxie S-IIIs in a month). Many of those buyers were upgrading from
earlier Galaxie models. So Samsung has built brand loyalty. Why do you think
Apple is spending so much more time attacking Samsung and much less time on the
their other competitors? It's because Samsung is a real competitive threat.
On the other side, with all their frivolous, whiny lawsuits, the perception
of Apple has changed. I can see it in the comments section every day on the
Internet -- people who were loyal Apple customers are sick of Apple's tactics.
(I mean a patent on "rectangular with rounded corners" -- really? Is that all
Apple has left?)
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
