[Ryan.]

Originally Posted by Red Moon

And Apple has never done that?

As Bill Gates reportedly said to jobs once: “Well, Steve, I think there’s more than one way of looking at it. I think it’s more like we both had this rich neighbour named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and found out that you had already stolen it.”

Of course, but Apple has done what Samsung used to do; that is look at what has already been achieved, add innovation and value and continue to innovate. Apple didn't simply copy the Xerox PARC project as is, it refined and sculpted it, adding original ideas and concepts.

That is what Samsung does not do. It is what HTC and Nokia have done: 'steal' the idea of a multitouch, thin, all screen smartphone, but add their own innovations and attempt to move the market forward. I doubt you even looked at the document, but you would clearly see Samsung made no attempt to add their own ideas in this case. They literally went 'this is how our product sucks, this is how the iPhone does it, this is how we go about copying the iPhone'. And that is why they have been left with a 1bn dollar bill, not for drawing inspiration from others work. But for plagiarism and theft.

Samsung is no better than those Chinese KIRF brands.

[Flamingjoe]

Originally Posted by Marc

That story forgot to mention how each jury member will shortly be receiving a new iPhone 4 and iPad 2

[Red Moon]

Originally Posted by Ryan.

Of course, but Apple has done what Samsung used to do; that is look at what has already been achieved, add innovation and value and continue to innovate. Apple didn't simply copy the Xerox PARC project as is, it refined and sculpted it, adding original ideas and concepts.

That is what Samsung does not do. It is what HTC and Nokia have done: 'steal' the idea of a multitouch, thin, all screen smartphone, but add their own innovations and attempt to move the market forward. I doubt you even looked at the document, but you would clearly see Samsung made no attempt to add their own ideas in this case. They literally went 'this is how our product sucks, this is how the iPhone does it, this is how we go about copying the iPhone'. And that is why they have been left with a 1bn dollar bill, not for drawing inspiration from others work. But for plagiarism and theft.

Samsung is no better than those Chinese KIRF brands.

The fact is Apple are no better than Samsung and it's not just Xerox they took idea's from it is Microsoft too, who in return Microsoft took ideas from Apple. It has all been going on for years.

The functionally comes from the operating system and that is Android. At the end of the day it is Android that Apple is after. It just happens to be going at Samsung first. But the thing is, like I said:

Originally Posted by Red Moon

To me it is like Coca-Cola designing a coke bottle and then patenting how you drink out of it, then suing Pepsi for allowing user's to use there bottles in the same way. It is madness.

The thing is once you start this thing were do you stop..... Mercedes Benz filing patent cases against every car maker in the world because they had the idea of the car first.

It all is a load of nonsense being able to patent of how I interact with a device is just stupid. As is patenting the look of an interface, it is like saying because I build a house with a door at the front and four windows by neighbour can't do the same.

It would serve Apple right if Samsung pulled all of it's hardware supplies from Apple and refused to let them to use their technology patents, it would sink most of their products in an instant.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Red Moon

Steve Jobs said:

"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs said. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”

That is what this all about and at the end of the day if Apple do win this war then we will be the losers. The people that use and buy smart phones.

....or you could just buy an iPhone... you wouldn't regret it.

[Red Moon]

Originally Posted by lostalex

....or you could just buy an iPhone... you wouldn't regret it.

Apple doesn't offer functionality of my phone in there limited range of products, however do you think everyone should buy Apple iPhones and iPads and that is it?

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Red Moon

Apple doesn't offer functionality of my phone in there limited range of products, however do you think everyone should buy Apple iPhones and iPads and that is it?

Yes, i do think that everyone should have access to the best technology on the market. Unfortunately, only Apple can provide it. I do wish the rest would catch up in their own unique and innovate ways...hopefully this decision will spark more innovation, now that they arn't allowed to just play catch up to Apple.

It's interesting that there's been no mention of RIM Blackberry in this thread yet. they are the perfect example of what happens when you just try to play catch up and stop innovating.

[Ryan.]

RIM has no reason to ever be discussed again. It will be completely dead by 2014.

[Red Moon]

Originally Posted by lostalex

Yes, i do think that everyone should have access to the best technology on the market. Unfortunately, only Apple can provide it.

And the only way that Apple think they can stay ahead is if they kill off the competition in the courts rather than the market place. The company is running scared of Android.

[Red Moon]

Originally Posted by Ryan.

RIM has no reason to ever be discussed again. It will be completely dead by 2014.

Maybe not if Apple have their way, they might be a surprising winner from all this if Android gets killed off as will the Microsoft Windows based smart phones.

[Red Moon]

Another way to look at it:

At the end of the day progress comes from copying one idea and adding something to it after you understand the idea.

It is what we all do from the moment we are born and we go through the education system. We are taught ideas and then we apply them to life. Over time we add to those ideas and make them our own and pass them on.

As the ideas travel from one generation to the next they become more refined and more developed and the originator of the idea becomes irrelevant.

This is a natural process that has taken us to where we are today.

However there is one thing that speed up the development process and that is competition. Look at the aircraft at the start of any of the world wars and then look at them again at the end of the conflict and see the difference. The rate of development was massive. Take away the war (the competition) and the rate of development becomes sedate.

Even if Apple have a point abut the patents, stifling competition means that Apple no longer need innovate at the same rate and even Apple customers will lose out.

[Ryan.]

Originally Posted by Red Moon

Another way to look at it:

At the end of the day progress comes from copying one idea and adding something to it after you understand the idea.

It is what we all do from the moment we are born and we go through the education system. We are taught ideas and then we apply them to life. Over time we add to those ideas and make them our own and pass them on.

As the ideas travel from one generation to the next they become more refined and more developed and the originator of the idea becomes irrelevant.

This is a natural process that has taken us to where we are today.

However there is one thing that speed up the development process and that is competition. Look at the aircraft at the start of any of the world wars and then look at them again at the end of the conflict and see the difference. The rate of development was massive. Take away the war (the competition) and the rate of development becomes sedate.

Even if Apple have a point abut the patents, stifling competition means that Apple no longer need innovate at the same rate and even Apple customers will lose out.

Exactly, and that's Apples issue here. Samsung didnt add anything of value, but slavishly copied every innovation Apple had come up with (as shown in that document) I'll say this again: HTC One, Nokia, Sony and RIM have proved there is more than one way to make a smartphone.

[Red Moon]

Originally Posted by Ryan.

Exactly, and that's Apples issue here. Samsung didnt add anything of value.

If they haven't added anything of value, then why do I know people that want to ditch their new iPhones for Galaxy S3's?

Unless they are just ditching them because the S3 has a big screen, they are faster and the hardware is more up to date. Most people say it has more features.

At the end of the day the sun doesn't shine out of Apples bottom, a lesson I have learnt myself. They are not the company they were, although are still good at giving people what they want. Maybe they should stick to that rather than spending money on law suits.

At the end of the day without competition even Apple users will lose out, as will everyone.

[armand.kay]

-uses a blackberry tablet and phone-

[Iceman]

Stupid american courts.... Much prefer my Samsung..... dont see the appeal of the anything apple bring out....and actually couldnt give a **** about them......eventually apples rot....

[Mrluvaluva]

Following its $1.049 billion court victory Friday, Apple is asking for a U.S. sales ban on eight Samsung devices, according to reports.

Those devices are:
Galaxy S 4G
Galaxy S2 (AT&T)
Galaxy S2 (Skyrocket)
Galaxy S2 (T-Mobile)
Galaxy S2 Epic 4G
Galaxy S Showcase
Droid Charge
Galaxy Prevail

Apple came up with the list after reviewing the verdict, decided by a nine-member jury. The Galaxy SII ban is carrier specific.

Why these?

The ban of eight may seem small when considering Apple was going after 28 devices during the course of the trial, however the ones it picked out are the only products still sold in the United States.

Each device was found to violate a design patent, utility patent, trade dress or have multiple infringements over the course of several years.

TechRadar has reached out to Samsung regarding if and how they intend to fight the proposed bans.

Samsung asked U.S. District judge Lucy Koh to lift a pre-trial ban she placed on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 after a jury found it didn't infringe on trade dress claims for the iPad 3.

[Shaun]

Saddening.

[Ryan.]

They won't get the sales ban.

[Sam:)]

**** sake, next thing apple will sue Isacc Newton claiming he had no right to discover gravity with apple.

I've had an iPhone 4 and I taught it was over-exhagerated... much prefer my iPod Touch, its cheaper and you dont feel as cautious with it.

[Ryan.]

http://gizmodo.com/5938468/samsung-i...urce=pulsenews

Samsung does it again. Honestly, it's things like this that show they are nothing but copying robbing bastards and they deserve to be sued.

[Mrluvaluva]

Apple is allegedly pushing for $3 billion in damages in its patent infringement case against Samsung, triple the amount initially order by a court.

The Korea Times reports that the iPad maker's lawyers will appeal to US District Judge Lucy Koh to increase the penalty at a hearing scheduled for this Friday (September 21).

Apple successfully sued Samsung for $1.05 billion last month after a jury found that the firm had copied critical features of the iPhone and iPad for its mobile devices.

In order to increase the damages, a jury must now find Samsung guilty of "wilful infringement" on five of the six patents in question. Judge Koh will have the power to meet Apple's request should this condition be met.

"By using that condition, Apple has decided to request the judge to order Samsung to pay more than $3 billion in the hearing on the San Jose verdict on September 21 in California," a legal source told the Korea Times.

Earlier this week, Samsung's request to overturn a sales injunction on its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the US market was rejected. The company has already taken action to file post-verdict motions against the judge's original decision.

Previous reports suggested that the Korean giant is planning to file an injunction against Apple's iPhone 5 over allegations that it violates its 4G patents.


DS

[Mrluvaluva]

Incidentally...

Apple is making an estimated Ł426 on every 16GB model of the iPhone 5 sold, as the device costs just Ł103 to build, according to a TechInsights report.

This, of course, does not factor in other costs, such as development, distribution, marketing and taxes, while TechInsights notes that the figure is just an estimate as the iPhone 5 has not been fully analysed.

TechInsights has compiled the report on what it believes are the costs of producing the new smartphone, which shifted 2m pre-orders worldwide in just 24 hours from September 14, doubling the record of its predecessor, the iPhone 4S.

Announced last week, the new phone features a larger 4-inch screen boasting a resolution of 1136 x 640 and 326 pixels per square inch. It also comes with Apple's new GPU A6 processor, improved camera technology and support for 4G LTE connectivity.

Apple has remained relatively tight-lipped on exact details about what is inside the iPhone 5, but TechInsights has made a number of estimates based on information that is available.

It estimates that it costs Apple $167.50 (Ł103) to make the iPhone 5 model with 16GB of storage. Due to improvements in processor and display standards, the phone is more costly in production than the iPhone 4S ($132.50) and the iPhone 4 ($112).

However, Apple is charging Ł529 for the SIM-free version of the iPhone 5 16GB, meaning it is making Ł426 on each handset sold.

DS

[Ryan.]

except that virtually noone buys handsets unlocked, meaning apple actually loses 10 up front for the 16GB. But ofc they make a fortune in contract costs

[flamingGalah!]

Apple are just

They don't like a bit of competition, end of.

It does amuse me how OTT Apple 'fans' are though, they think of Apple as some sort of God to worship, I swear there is some sort of brainwash technology hidden within their products

I did have an iPhone, but prefer a phone to have buttons to press lol. It's Blackberry all the way for me

[Mrluvaluva]

Samsung can continue to sell the Galaxy Nexus in the United States after winning the latest stage in its patent dispute with Apple.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, based in Washington DC, overturned a California judge's order blocking Samsung from selling its smartphone amid the lawsuit by Apple.

Apple accuses Samsung of stealing its smartphone and tablet computer technology.

A jury in September agreed with the company, and ordered Samsung to pay $1bn. Samsung has now appealed against the judgement.

The Washington appeals court said Apple had failed to show that any of the patent violations it accused Samsung of in regards to the Galaxy would immediately and irreparably hurt its own smartphone sales.

It said judge Lucy Koh had abused her discretion in granting Apple a preliminary injunction earlier this year.

Ms Koh, a California District Court judge, ruled Samsung had copied critical features of the iPhone and iPad.

The jury also found Apple did not infringe any of Samsung's asserted patents.

Samsung and Apple are locked in a global patent battle in 10 countries, including the US.

In August, a court in Tokyo dismissed Apple's claim that South Korean firm Samsung had infringed its patent.

The stakes are high as the two technology giants fight for the top spot in the booming smartphone market.

The Galaxy Nexus is a third-generation touchscreen Android smartphone developed by a partnership between Google and Samsung.

Apple, meanwhile, recently unveiled the iPhone 5, with the iPad mini expected to be announced before Christmas.

Samsung's own tablet, the Nexus 7, won a T3 Gadget Award on Monday.


Sky

[arista]

"Ban on Samsung Galaxy Nexus overturned
by US court in fresh blow for Apple in its war with Google
Court of Appeals ruling could have
major implications in future attempts
to ban competitors' products
Apple failed to prove that consumers
purchased the Samsung product because
of the infringing technology, the appeals court ruled"


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...#ixzz29HOjCrXK



Yes Fair is Fair
people need a choice.