Phil Schiller claims in court Samsung weakened Apple's brand power

Apple's Senior Vice President of Worldwide Marketing, Phil Schiller, took the stand in court during the ongoing suit between the company he has long represented and Samsung. During his time acting as a witness, he offered up quite a few interesting comments and opinions on Samsung's products and their impact on Apple as a whole.

"It weakens the view that the world has for Apple," he said when talking about his view that Samsung copies and has copied multiple Apple products. He claims it's this copying that has led people to "question our innovation and design skills in a way that people never used to." He also spoke about his reaction when Samsung first released the Galaxy S Smartphone. "I was quite shocked. They went and copied the iPhone."

Samsung's attorney Bill Price had a few counters to Schiller's statements. "Apple doesn’t own a patent on a product being beautiful or sexy. Isn’t that correct?" Price asked rhetorically. He also pointed out that Samsung was first to unveil a smaller tablet with a 7-inch display before Apple later unveiled a similarly sized 7.9-inch tablet. Schiller said in response that the iPad mini was originally an experiment within Apple rather than a result of what the competition was doing.

The original court ruling last year was that Samsung owed Apple $1.05 billion in damages. Judge Lucy Koh has since ordered a retrial. Apple now wants $380 million, but Samsung feels it only needs to pay $52 million.

Source: WSJ | Image via WSJ

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Ballmer exit interview details his love for Microsoft, Ford CEO's role in reorganization

Next Story

Giveaway: ZTE Open with Firefox OS [UPDATE WITH WINNER]

147 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I wonder who copied who?

http://media.idownloadblog.com.../Samsung-F700-vs-iPhone.jpg

The only true difference? One was running a 32bit OS, while the other was running something less. But look at the over all design. same rounded corners, same centralized home button, 4 icons on bottom row, same full screen device. All Apple did was replace the side with chrome plated plastic.

And Koh didn't allow Samsung to present this device as evidence that they had a running working marketed device that the iPhone looks a lot like.

Blind coincidence? I THINK NOT.

http://images.dailytech.com/ni...ng_Picture_Frame_v_iPad.png

In a courtroom and you sk someone to tell u which one is an iPad from a distance, how many people would get it wrong? LOTS OF THEM. In fact it was said by Best Buy, many people brought back the Galaxy Tab because why? THEY THOUGHT THEY HAD PURCHASE AN IPAD. How? Because they simply grabbed the box based on similar looks, not reading the name. BUT WHO HAD IT FIRST?

In both cases Samsung product predates the Apple product that looks like the Samsung product.

Who is copying who? Did Samsung sue Apple? NOPE! Should they? With what Apple is doing now...YES!!!

In fact, it was Apple who diminished Samsung's possible sales by copying, not the other way around. But Samsung has turned a full 180 on Apple. And instead of suing Apple they did the same thing to Apple and they are beating Apple.

Even tho there are products that mimic Apple's products more closely like the GooPhones, Apple wont sue them because they are not a market threat. Samsung was a partner and we all know how Apple feels about partners who decide to compete. We saw what they did to Microsoft, Intel, Sony, Google, Yahoo and others.

Yet when things are bad, who does APple go running too. In 2006 it was GOOGLE...in 1997 it was MICROSOFT, In 2011 it was GOOGLE Again. In 2006 it was INTEL. And in 2009,10,11,12 and 13 who are they running too? SAMSUNG. Don't you iFan muffins got to say.

Edited by Hi_XPecTa_Chens, Nov 19 2013, 4:12pm :

Why do you make it so easy for me to prove you wrong?!?!?

This picture above says the F700 was shown at CeBit 2006, and then released in 2007, making Apple and the iPhone the one that copied them. This is completely false. We here love Android, not Apple, but this is a interesting story and I just felt like sharing either way. Even if Apple is in the right. According to the picture the F700 was introduced in 2006, and Apple stole the design. I'm not going to get to deep on this, but the F700 was never seen until February of 2007 and our very own slashgear had it completely covered. This is AFTER Apple announced and showed the world the iPhone January 9th 2007 at MacWorld.

We can go even deeper here also. The photo above mentions that the Samsung F700 was “shown” at CeBit 2006, that is wrong it was 2007.

stevan said,
Clearly you also think Microsoft bailed Apple which is just a myth. Your credibility is lost.
They did bail them out. But the money they paid isn't what saved Apple. Let me make you look crazey again.

The way they bailed out Apple was simple. At the time devs were leaving Apple's platform do to low Mac sales. In fcat, on an average, apple sold at the time less than 1M Macs per year. With that short of income Apple was losing devs which made the Mac look even more dated and useless.

Microosft is the world's largest software developer. If Microsoft would have left Apple as being the largest dev on the planet, that would have sent a signal to other devs that if Microsoft was leaving Apple, the ship is likely sinking.

I mean look at the facts man. From the time of the first Mac to 1997, Apple had roughly about 100,000 apps, while Windows had twice as many even before Windows 95. After Windows 95, Windows support grew to the tune of over 1M unique applications were avail by the time we got to Windows XP.

The PPC Mac has a 250,000 total application support. The major Apps being from the same players that have made tons of money on Windows, like Microosft and Adobe.

Adobe was borne on the Mac. However After Apple spat in their face recently over Flash, If I was Adobe I would never even make another application for Apple because Adobe doesn't need Apple.

IBM too was another fool like Apple in thinking all the money is in hardware. As Gates said, computers are just boxes with blinking lights without software.

Microosft saved Apple by doing a deal. A deal to support Apple with Office which they threaten to take away if Apple didn't play fair. As need Apple resorted to partnerimg with MS again, they made IE default on Mac OS, they worked together on Java and more, Without devs any platform is dead and is you lose the largest player in the game as a partner you will die.

Look what happened when Apple tried to distance itself from Google. They made a maps app that even today is still riddled with problems. What was the last thing I heard? The maps apps was directing people onto a runway at an airport. Amazing.

Without Google services the iPhone would slowly die. I think one reason Windows Phone isn't where it could b is because Google is playing hardball with MS. But it is a losing battle because no company like Google or Apple can win against Microsoft.

They did save Apple. The money helped too. And yes that money did included a patent settlement. Apple needed more than money in 1997. That's why they brought Steve Jobs back. They were dying. Bill Gates strategy is simple, you make people need you. Apple does it different, they rather have people want you and as time has show, lots of people don't want Apple.

stevan said,

Why do you make it so easy for me to prove you wrong?!?!?

All you did was quote what someone else said. Not your own reasoning. The F700 wasn't publicly seen until Feb 2007...still predates the iPhone even if it was only 1 day before.

What you aren't considering is simple. Apple and Samsung are partners. How many times do you think they visited each other. I am sure there are people on both side who leak information. I mean come on dude...

You have the same problem Apple has. You don't think outside the box. You aren't using any sense or reasoning. You just accept everything as black and white.

TechieXP said,
All you did was quote what someone else said. Not your own reasoning. The F700 wasn't publicly seen until Feb 2007...still predates the iPhone even if it was only 1 day before.

What you aren't considering is simple. Apple and Samsung are partners. How many times do you think they visited each other. I am sure there are people on both side who leak information. I mean come on dude...

You have the same problem Apple has. You don't think outside the box. You aren't using any sense or reasoning. You just accept everything as black and white.

Iphone was shown in January 2007, and F700 was in February. That's why Samsung couldn't sue apple.

Once again, why do you keep making it so simple for me to prove you wrong?

To all the people that think Apple copied Sony should type "Sony suing" into google. If they are taking so many companies to court you can bet they would sue Apple.

But typical excuses from fanboys as to why they arent

stevan said,
To all the people that think Apple copied Sony should type "Sony suing" into google. If they are taking so many companies to court you can bet they would sue Apple.

But typical excuses from fanboys as to why they arent


Doesn't matter, copying is copying. Apple decided to get inspired by Sony and copied their design and made some few fine adjustments to the design to their first iPhone.

Just because Sony haven't sued Apple for it doesn't automaticly means it's not copying.

Exynos said,

Doesn't matter, copying is copying. Apple decided to get inspired by Sony and copied their design and made some few fine adjustments to the design to their first iPhone.

Just because Sony haven't sued Apple for it doesn't automaticly means it's not copying.

Nice try but it does. It means Sony doesn't think they were ripped off and therefore aren't pursuing Apple. If there was any chance Sony could sue Apple, they would. That is how companies protect their intellectual properties.

Clearly Apple had a case against Samsungs copying, which they took to the courts and in which they have made progress.

You can deny it all you want.

stevan said,

Nice try but it does. It means Sony doesn't think they were ripped off and therefore aren't pursuing Apple. If there was any chance Sony could sue Apple, they would. That is how companies protect their intellectual properties.

Clearly Apple had a case against Samsungs copying, which they took to the courts and in which they have made progress.

You can deny it all you want.


So if you put a picture in your copy machine in your office and makes a copy out of it and no one sues you for copying that picture, it's still a copy you took of that picture.

Exynos said,

So if you put a picture in your copy machine in your office and makes a copy out of it and no one sues you for copying that picture, it's still a copy you took of that picture.

This is probably the most horrible comparison I have ever read. We are talking about multi billion dollar companies and you say this......LOL!!!!!!

stevan said,

This is probably the most horrible comparison I have ever read. We are talking about multi billion dollar companies and you say this......LOL!!!!!!


Doesn't matter if the company are rich, poor or simply corrupt as the meaning of copying is still copying no matter if it's taken to court or not.

Exynos said,

Doesn't matter if the company are rich, poor or simply corrupt as the meaning of copying is still copying no matter if it's taken to court or not.

Maybe you should look into how many smaller companies have used Apple in the last 5-10 years and won. These companies took on a Giant in court knowing that Apple either took or infringed on their technology. And they won!

So the point is that if Sony thought Apple copied them as much as you do, they would sue. You can bet on that.

Come man, let's be realistic now...

stevan said,

Maybe you should look into how many smaller companies have used Apple in the last 5-10 years and won. These companies took on a Giant in court knowing that Apple either took or infringed on their technology. And they won!

So the point is that if Sony thought Apple copied them as much as you do, they would sue. You can bet on that.

Come man, let's be realistic now...


I'm being realistic by knowing copying is still copying. Don't be that blind.

In a document filed to the courts by Apple, the company points to a prototype device, pictured above, which was codenamed "Purple". It bears plenty of similarity to the iPhone we know, and Apple claims it predates the Sony-style device that came to light last week by months.

stevan said,
Look at the Samsung vs Apple and bringing Sony part in. Should open your eyes.

Tell us what the definition of copying is?

stevan said,

In a document filed to the courts by Apple, the company points to a prototype device, pictured above, which was codenamed "Purple". It bears plenty of similarity to the iPhone we know, and Apple claims it predates the Sony-style device that came to light last week by months.


Yeah, Apple got inspired by those Sony phones and did copy them and made some fine adjustments to their design after that.

What? Did you even read what I posted? That Apple had designs in house that predate Sony ones.

And you asked me to be realistic? Haha holy crap!

stevan said,
What? Did you even read what I posted? That Apple had designs in house that predate Sony ones.

And you asked me to be realistic? Haha holy crap!


Apple still got inspired by someone and copied them. So you can twist is how you want, but you can't get away from the fact that Apple copied those who they got inspired over.

If you say Samsung copied Apple, then Apple also copied Sony or whoever they got inspired over.

What are you talking about? Apple had designs that came before Sony, and those designs were very close to the iphone. Where do you see Sony in this?

And why do you think Samsung never proceeded with lawsuit then?

stevan said,
What are you talking about? Apple had designs that came before Sony, and those designs were very close to the iphone. Where do you see Sony in this?

And why do you think Samsung never proceeded with lawsuit then?


Read what i said, i said Sony or WHOEVER Apple got inspired over.

Oh so now it's other companies? Haha you're hilarious. Thanks for debating with me this long, took a while but got my point accross. Apple haters and general trolls are much worse than fanboys.

stevan said,
Oh so now it's other companies? Haha you're hilarious. Thanks for debating with me this long, took a while but got my point accross. Apple haters and general trolls are much worse than fanboys.

Does it matter what companies it is when all that counts is who Apple have got inspired by and copied?

stevan said,
What are you talking about? Apple had designs that came before Sony, and those designs were very close to the iphone. Where do you see Sony in this?

And why do you think Samsung never proceeded with lawsuit then?

Yes Apple had designs before Sony. Guess what, they used NONE OF THEM.

Here is a fact I am sure you are not aware of. When Apple saw the LG Prada at CES, they were in fact working on a smartphone design. After seeing the Prada Apple ripped up their original plans and hire Sonly to make a minimalistic design for there phone.

If you look at the designs that were presented on the court case, that were made by the one guy that so conveniently got sick and went to Hawaii so he couldn't appear in court, was going to testify to how he was paid to make the designs APple did use. In fact one of those designs Sony made was used in 2009 for the iPhone 4. Apple didn't design that phone, Sony did. Sony also design what became the iPhone originally.

In fact if you look at Apple original drawings, none of them even have any of the elements you see in any model of iPhone Apple has released so far. NOT ONE SINGLE ELEMENT.

In fact, Apple original designs were uglier than many of the rushed to market craptastic iPhone wannabes that appeared after the iPhone. Like the Samsung Instinct, which I remember because I bought one. It wasn't until 2009 when HTC beat the pants of Apple with sales of 2 phones the EVO 4G and the Incredible that people start looking past the iPhone. That following Xmas, even more better options came from Samsung including the Galaxy S.

Apple did some good things with the iPhone design, I will never say they didn't. What I am saying is, Apple got their inspiration from Sony. Just like Samsung, LG, Sony and others are inspired by things that are great about the iPhone. And so they all have copied something. THAT INCLUDED APPLE. Your problem is you want to act like every product APple has made has been original...fcats show NONE OF THEM ARE. They all have a product that predates Apple own. ALL OF THEM.

Before Apple had a desktop PC, someone had one even tho it wasn;t massively in production. Who was it? XEROX.. the Xerox Star which was a desktop prototype.

Before Apple ever made a portable Mac, someone had one. Texas Instruments had a portable TRS80 and more. Even Xerox had a portable. Time and better manufacturing capability simply slimmed everything down.

Apple has capitalized on the mistakes many other company's like Sony, Microsoft and others have made. The stuff Apple makes now we had 2 decades ago. timing is everything. What does the iPod do that Sony digital players didn't do? NOTHING. While Sony was wasting time fighting over proprietary media formats, Apple came in and beat them at their own game.

Stop acting like Apple is so innocent.

To all the Apple cheerleaders where did Apple get the concepts and ideas for the following products?

The Mac? Mac OS? Newton? iPod? iPhone? iPad? OS X?
There are basically all the products they have made. Which one doesn't have a product that predates it?

If you can show me one single product Apple ever invented from scratch...let me know.

Before someone says Lightning? That was made by Intel. It is an improved version of SCSI which Apple also didn't invent.

Apple has lost all credibility because they went and tried to make what they do best, a grounds to litigate.

Products are improved by COPYING. How did we get to today's automibile, aeroplane, skyscraper and so many more inventions?

The lame things Apple cried about is the same they did against Microsoft. What happened? Apple lost. They lost in every other country. Where they lose they made changes that even though Apple said it wasn't enough, the judge said otherwise.

Look at all these phones that look like Galaxy devices. I don't see Samsung suing. Look at the Vega Secret Note, Optimus Pro, Motorola X and many more.

Yet all those phone makers are getting along well. Samsung is the leader in their market and they are trying to get a piece of the action. Just like GM and Chrysler did too Ford.

You imitate what works. The iPod beat the Walkman because Apple simplified the concept and made it appealing. The idea wasn't new. IPhone took all the benefits of the modern smartphone and PDA, and tied everything to a screen.

The iPad took all the concepts Gates showed in 2000 and work of others to where today's chips make such a device possible.

But the fans find it ok for Apple to sue for what they themselves are guilty of? That is where they all show selective ignorance.

That's why you all get called sheep and fanbois. Because even when Apple is blatantly wrong, you stand on their side.

So Samsung became so good that...now they're butt hurt that they're doing well off and since they can't innovate, lets litigate. Way to go! This is what I don't like about Apple and I am not saying Samsung is completely innocent. They do have faults as well, therefore deserve some amount of fine for sure.

So everyone wants to pin Samsung to a stake? What about Apple. What some see to forget the F 700 predates the iPhone. It has a full touch screen and a centralized home button. It was small and ugly but it is easy to see with better manufacturing and design, it would look a lot like the Galaxy S.

People seem to think if Apple makes it to market first than it must be there idea. Example, Apple saw Android coming, they rushed to beat Google. They saw the Prada and they rush and hired Sony to make a design and beat the Prada by a year. Everything Apple has is stolen including the company name.

I means let's go back in time. The first thing ever stolen? An Apple was stolen off a tree. Like American means stolen country, Apple just means stolen.

Apple has this insane hate for any company to use a similar idea and do better. They did it to Microsoft, Intel and others.

I personally would t sit and say the first Galaxy S doesn't look very similar to the iPhone. Lots of cars look like too. Look at the rear taillights of the Nissan Juke. Don't they resemble the Volo SUNS from behind?

I guess everyone who makes cars needs to makes alternative sales for wheels and steering wheels and such?

The Galaxy S may look similar, but it was better. Bigger screen, faster Web browsing and better features. As the first of its kind from Samsung, at least it supported capabilities that even cheap flip phones did while the first iPhone did not.

Samsung to the best aspects of iPhone and simply made them better. Much like Gates did with Windows vs OS X.

Look how many phones look like the Galaxy Note. LOS Optimus Pro. What this phone called the Note from this other company....Pantech Secret Note. It's looks like a Note even down to.its specs. But I don't see Samsung crying like a little biscuit.

it's like in Iron Man when Zachariah told Tony, "just because you have an idea, doesn't mean it belongs to you." Especially from a company who have stole others people stuff and took full credit.

Apple is getting their but ts handed to them buy Samsung and as Apple did with Microsoft, even though we did stuff together, I am now going to sue you because you now want to compete against me?

Getting past the Galaxy S, the rest of the devices in the S series look nothing like the iPhone, so what does Apple do? Talk about icons and snap back as being things that should be protected.

Yet look at iOS now. Flat? Hummm! Toggles? Notification? Maps? iTunes?

What about how Siri's UI looks nothing like it did when it was an app, but looks like that app from China?

What about all the stolen product names? McIntosh, iPhone, iPod, iPad. Even their company name. They stole the GUY concept from Xerox.

How about Samsung and Google make 7" tablets popular and Apple rushing to make the Mini after years of saying the 10 iPad wad the best size and that OR MS would drop the small devices for big ones?

How about Apple rushing to make the next iPhone bigger? Oh wait, 3.5" was the best because u can reach all points of the phone with one hand. So my change? 4 inch now? What's next? 13" iPad?

Everyone copy's. A good idea is worth copying. Which would u rather make a transatlantic flight in, the Kitty Hawk by the Wright's? Or Boeing's 747?

U don't own and idea. You own the way you make it a reality
But that doesn't mean someone can make that reality better.

All these idiots siding with Apple. Why even choose a side? They both are greedy corporations. The main difference is Samsung is competing where it matters in the open market and Apple has chosen the court room. In the end Apple may when the battle, but Samsung is winning the war.

Oh and Apple decided that since Samsung cam sell plastic phones at high margins, they may as well go back and try. THEY FAIL. Today it was announced that Apple is again cutting production of the 5C. In fact, Foxconn is making only 50000 units per day and Pentagon...or whatever the name is making 150000 units which is a 50% drop from October when they were at 300 per day.

So like Newton, PING and the Mac, we now have a failed iPhone.
All these Apple techs are dough bags anyway
I watch Jonathan Ivy try to keep a straight face while he is trying to sell u on buying the same phone as last year in a candy coated she'll and how they again reinvented the smartphone with its uni body design. What is he smoking? I want some.

Oh and let me attack the fingerprint reader. It works exactly the same as they do on laptops and other phones which have had them for years. All Apple did was buy the company who.found a way to fit the sensor into a button..

But let's see...how much R&D does this need? None. How do we know no one else was going to so this? Fact - ARM already had 64Bit chips rolling up to soon be released.Like Samsung, Apple is an ARM licensee. Which means they both eventually were going to have it. So, Apple.pushed to be first
Why? So all the fans can come defend them saying look everyone else is copying. LAME.

Now look at iOS. Crashing, lags more than any Android phone I have ever used with exception of one, the Samsung Charge. 4 updates already to fix crap that should have been found in testing
Just like with the iPhone 4. As with Ford, Toyota and GM, they all loss quality when production. Became more important. Apple has now fallen from grace and instead of fixing the issue, they are asking the government and the law to save them.

What a joke. Good luck Apple. I will watch u fall like Microsoft, RIM, Nokia and others have done. You sat and milked the platform to death and now it's gonna bite you in the butt.

Edited by Hi_XPecTa_Chens, Nov 17 2013, 4:47pm :

So when Samsung does deliver something that Apple didn't do it first and then Apple releases, it's not copying but "an experiment".
Hypocrisy.

How do you spell unbridled butthurt? A-p-p-l-e
What a bunch of classless clowns. Somewhere Jobs is rolling in his grave...that he likely stole from someone else too.

Fanboys. Fanboys everywhere.

I would like to point out that copying is not necessarily a bad thing, if anything, if you can take an idea from another and then improve upon it yourself from your own angle, then surely this encourages innovation to thrive at a mutch faster rate.

This surely also determines whether or not something is a true innovation, for if the competition can simply in a few weeks make the exact same concept, then was the idea really that groundbreaking in the first place? A good example of this would be the Iris app on android. This app was made within 8 hours, which surely indicates that the technology that drives Siri is not that big of a technological jump.

Edited by Ad Man Gamer, Nov 16 2013, 5:07pm :

Ad Man Gamer said,
Fanboys. Fanboys everywhere.

I would like to point out that copying is not necessarily a bad thing, if anything, if you can take an idea from another and then improve upon it yourself from your own angle, then surely this encourages innovation to thrive at a mutch faster rate.

This surely also determines whether or not something is a true innovation, for if the competition can simply in a few weeks make the exact same concept, then was the idea really that groundbreaking in the first place? A good example of this would be the Iris app on android. This app was made within 8 hours, which surely indicates that the technology that drives Siri is not that big of a technological jump.

Haha. Go on google, type in Siri vs Iris and read.

Okay. I have just watched a video with Siri and Iris answering questions dated 2012. Throughout the video, there was questions which Siri could not answer as well as questions that Iris could not answer. Overall it looks like a pretty even match between the two, with the ball going back and forth with which one produced the more comical answer.

Overall it looks like that Iris is a pretty comparable replacement facility on the android platform, and when you consider that it was developed within eight hours, it is pretty remarkable software. There was a couple of things that was pointed out such as the interface and the voice that Iris uses, both of which are personal preference. but i will admit that the voice on Siri is much more natural.

What I don't understand is how Apple has a copyright on the on-off/home button on all their products (actually it's only one - the iPod - all others are copies). If you look at any desktop computer all of them have an on-off button that presses inward. So where does Apple come off saying they invented that? Apple is a stealer, starting with the rip-off of Xerox.

Also, stealing is inherent in all of us. It comes naturally. If you ever watch Animal Planet, notice when an animal makes a kill, there's always another animal trying to take it away from them. Same thing here, a company makes a killing off of a product, there's always another company trying to take it away from them. It's the way we are.

it's this copying that has led people to "question our innovation and design

What innovation and design skills? It's features are lagging behind competition and the design hasn't changed in years apart from making it longer to jam another row of icons in.

when Samsung first released the Galaxy S Smartphone. "I was quite shocked. They went and copied the iPhone."

Imagine how LG felt when the iPhone arrived!

Wasn't the first iPhone a copy from someone else's work too?

Btw. shouldn't Schiller focus on delivering innovation and quality instead of whining that others use icons with rounded corners?
Seriously, since when is it the icons that make an OS good? The whole case just shows how silly and ignorant Apple really are.

OMG how ****ing arrogant!! they claim the 5S had record breaking sales i think but 5c did worse which is duh obvious, the ipad air prolly smashed sales and so will the new mini and will probably on for the best quarter theyve had.... how the **** is that damaging there brand? when sales go UP it hasnt damaged **** all. They know that if the iphone and ipad suddenly flopped theyd have barely any revenue compared to what there achieving now. and with there 140billion in the bank what exactly do they innovate cus they certainly not plowing money into R&D, probably working on how to better fool there bull**** detection meters!!! sorry for the rant but this is why i hate them as a company

psionicinversion said,
OMG how ****ing arrogant!! they claim the 5S had record breaking sales i think but 5c did worse which is duh obvious, the ipad air prolly smashed sales and so will the new mini and will probably on for the best quarter theyve had.... how the **** is that damaging there brand? when sales go UP it hasnt damaged **** all. They know that if the iphone and ipad suddenly flopped theyd have barely any revenue compared to what there achieving now. and with there 140billion in the bank what exactly do they innovate cus they certainly not plowing money into R&D, probably working on how to better fool there bull**** detection meters!!! sorry for the rant but this is why i hate them as a company

I wonder why is it that people who hate Apple are same people who can't put a sentence together when posting something?

sure its one big paragraph but im sick of apples whining and stuff. They know damn well without the iphone and ipad theyd go back to being pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things, there like a child banging a drum in the playroom cus its had its toy taken away from em.

They want to define a generation come up with that killer original gadget/device that is a must have, but thats one device that will never come from apple. theyll buy the company then screw up the original vision for it to suit themselves, Siri anyone!!!

stevan said,

I wonder why is it that people who hate Apple are same people who can't put a sentence together when posting something?

and I wonder why people who love Apple can only say the same crap all the time. I wonder why people who love Apple so much, when handed facts can't debate them.

stevan said,

I wonder why is it that people who hate Apple are same people who can't put a sentence together when posting something?

and I wonder why people who love Apple can never retort to posts that contain facts and truths and they always resort to name calling and becoming grammar policemen.

Apple weakened Palm's design... Do you have ever see a color palm ? It's obviously the iPhone home screen.I know Apple has the Newton but it's also inspired by Psion and other first handled devices.
I'm tired of a company releasing product and claiming everywhere that from now it's her invention.
they use universal design (when they didn't pick up elsewhere) and they would want it becomes their property...

So Phil Schiller is Apple's Senior Vice President of Worldwide Marketing. And even he cant see that they are killing their own brand?

I was studying at the library, and I over heard a girl telling a friend about a phone call that she just received. She said that XXX was at the Apple store trying to get help, and she apparently had to wait for a long time before she got any help. When she finally managed to get help from one of the clerks, she was treated badly.
THIS coupled with:
* "You are holding it wrong" "There is no antenna problem"
*Insane pricing
*1 year limited warranty on a product that cost almost 1000$.
* Apple suing the sh't out of everyone.
* And lately their bad innovation

Will kill a brand, of course people will move away from Apple..

They get 2 years warranty in EU. And if you're willing to go to court over it, you can get 3 years out of it.
And innovation, meh. This always happens after a new product, IMO they brought little new to the table except the first iPhone when it comes to smart phones. Its the little things that matter (for) now.

Samsung certainly copied here and there, but "never used to"? Really? I've questioned Apple's design skills further back than the neo-Jobs era. Their 'designs' rarely take the laws of physics into account and tend to have obvious/stupid flaws that lead to damage even through normal use.

Meh.

Get over yourself Apple. Just keep innovating, and making awesome products, and you'll be fine, as will Samsung.

Nashy said,
Get over yourself Apple. Just keep innovating, and making awesome products, and you'll be fine, as will Samsung.

Actually you mean keep stealing. Apple does not innovate nor do they make awesome products. Try again.

No, I didn't mean stealing, but thanks for trying to correct me anyway. They do make awesome products, that's why they sell. Just because you personally don't like something, doesn't mean you can come in, and reply with such tripe to something I say.

If you'd like to reply like an adult, without your clear bias towards whatever platform you love, feel free.

Phil Schiller is just butthurt that Samsung got inspired by Apple and took something from them and made it MUCH MUCH better in the same way as Apple got inspired by Sony and made things that way better.

Apple just have to HTFU and STFU and stop crying because someone is doing a better job than them.

Exynos said,
Phil Schiller is just butthurt that Samsung got inspired by Apple and took something from them and made it MUCH MUCH better in the same way as Apple got inspired by Sony and made things that way better.

Apple just have to HTFU and STFU and stop crying because someone is doing a better job than them.


At least you're recognizing that they copied Apple, although you euphemized it, as opposed to others who simply deny.

Exynos said,
Phil Schiller is just butthurt that Samsung got inspired by Apple and took something from them and made it MUCH MUCH better in the same way as Apple got inspired by Sony and made things that way better.

Apple just have to HTFU and STFU and stop crying because someone is doing a better job than them.

Are people on Neowin starting to admit that Samsung took something from Apple?

Mr.XXIV said,
I'm getting tired of the pricks of Android, let's go about the 4000 Android models once more compared to 8 iPhones.

You know what I find odd about Android? Now the dock on the bottom in iOS (http://www.idevice.ro/wp-conte...013/07/iOS-7-Dock-Theme.jpg) came from the Mac's dock. We know the Mac got it from NeXTSTEP, all which were under the leadership of Steve Jobs. How did Android suddenly end up with the same design concept, especially when the pre-iPhone beta of Android had none of the sorts? Strange.

Exynos said,
Phil Schiller is just butthurt that Samsung got inspired by Apple and took something from them and made it MUCH MUCH better in the same way as Apple got inspired by Sony and made things that way better.

Apple just have to HTFU and STFU and stop crying because someone is doing a better job than them.

it's like saying Chevy (or any current car company) lowered Fords brand power by copying the first car....

AWilliams87 said,

At least you're recognizing that they copied Apple, although you euphemized it, as opposed to others who simply deny.

Do you know the differences by copying Apple and take some functionality from Apple and make them better?

By taking some few functions from each others and change them in their own ways is not copying each others. Apples does this everyday, so it must be fine then i'll guess. So everyone else can do the same then, right?

When Apple gets features, they buy the companies that provide the certain features, they don't try to run off their own version that feels unfit unlike HTC's fingerprint scanner phone that released a month after the 5s. Their phones are never optimized when they should be. Apple looks for quality services to implement unlike many Android companies that just "copy".

Mr.XXIV said,
When Apple gets features, they buy the companies that provide the certain features, they don't try to run off their own version that feels unfit unlike HTC's fingerprint scanner phone that released a month after the 5s. Their phones are never optimized when they should be. Apple looks for quality services to implement unlike many Android companies that just "copy".

Kinda funny that you whine about Android companies are copying Apple when all Apple is doing today is to copy Android (notification bar is a good example on that) bits for bits.

All Apple is doing today is catch up with the other companies.

Exynos said,

Kinda funny that you whine about Android companies are copying Apple when all Apple is doing today is to copy Android (notification bar is a good example on that) bits for bits.

All Apple is doing today is catch up with the other companies.

You're full of crap. How the hell is Apple playing catchup? What happened to Samsung trying to take Passbook? HTC Fingerprint still doesn't mean anything?

How is it that a phone with has less cores and RAM and STILL outperforms mane of the Androids with bigger specs?

Why is it that there are so many phones out there, especially Samsung's list of Galaxies, and you think Apple cares when they only have 8 phones that did better than the rest for so long?

You're an utter trip. I swear. How about you worry about the fact that there are 100s of Android companies and there's only 1 Apple company. Don't get me started on all the Windows Tablet and Phone manufactures. It's pathetic.

Mr.XXIV said,

You're full of crap. How the hell is Apple playing catchup? What happened to Samsung trying to take Passbook? HTC Fingerprint still doesn't mean anything?

How is it that a phone with has less cores and RAM and STILL outperforms mane of the Androids with bigger specs?

Why is it that there are so many phones out there, especially Samsung's list of Galaxies, and you think Apple cares when they only have 8 phones that did better than the rest for so long?

You're an utter trip. I swear.


If you don't know why Apple is playing catch up with other brands, then i'm afraid you don't live on the same planet as i and others do.

Having a better performance isn't all when it's about smartphones today. You have screen sizes, battery sizes, alot of RAM so you can do real multitasking without lagging, having the ability to expand the storage capabilities and to have the freedom to make up your own choices on how the phone should work.

All of those things are much better than having the best performance. Having best performance doesn't say anything that the phone who are 2nd best in performance isn't doing bad in anything.

And lastly, the only place where the iPhone 5S is better in performance than the best Android phone is in the web browser test. But everyone knows that Safari sucks anyways no matter how good performance scores it gets on the browser tests. My proof of that is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LY-KuPhC0Y0

So have a nice day.

Exynos said,

If you don't know why Apple is playing catch up with other brands, then i'm afraid you don't live on the same planet as i and others do.

Having a better performance isn't all when it's about smartphones today. You have screen sizes, battery sizes, alot of RAM so you can do real multitasking without lagging, having the ability to expand the storage capabilities and to have the freedom to make up your own choices on how the phone should work.

All of those things are much better than having the best performance. Having best performance doesn't say anything that the phone who are 2nd best in performance isn't doing bad in anything.

And lastly, the only place where the iPhone 5S is better in performance than the best Android phone is in the web browser test. But everyone knows that Safari sucks anyways no matter how good performance scores it gets on the browser tests. My proof of that is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LY-KuPhC0Y0

So have a nice day.


Real multitasking without lag lol? Is that an argument in favor of the iPhone? Fortunately for iPhone, it doesn't need 4GB RAM to function normally. The same is true with Windows phone as well.

AWilliams87 said,

Real multitasking without lag lol? Is that an argument in favor of the iPhone? Fortunately for iPhone, it doesn't need 4GB RAM to function normally. The same is true with Windows phone as well.

LOL, ofc iOS works good as it is. But comparing iOS 7 to Android 4.4 is like comparing Windows 95 to Windows 8.1.

Exynos said,

LOL, ofc iOS works good as it is. But comparing iOS 7 to Android 4.4 is like comparing Windows 95 to Windows 8.1.

What version will the android have to get to before they did of that lag everyone on the Internet is talking about? Or maybe we have to wait until Android devices hit 8 gigs of ram?

Something 50-60 years ago doesn't really count. Of the millions of products in the last century, you might as well call that a coincidence.

Mr.XXIV said,
Something 50-60 years ago doesn't really count. Of the millions of products in the last century, you might as well call that a coincidence.

Exynos does not understand design patents and how they have changed over the last 50 years, so don't bother.

stevan said,

Wonder why Apple isn't getting sued then?


Ehm, this is not about who gets sued by who. It's about that Apple is copying things from others as everyone else does the same. It's a normal practice in todays business.

Exynos said,

Ehm, this is not about who gets sued by who. It's about that Apple is copying things from others as everyone else does the same. It's a normal practice in todays business.

Here I'll make it easy for you:

There're two answers to this and while they rather overlap they are distinct. The first is that patent law has changed in recent years. Such things as the Braun designs would not have been covered by patents when they were released. Patents on such things just were not available. Now patents on design very much are available. The EU has special design patents and the US system seems to have expanded to include them. This is how Apple can now lay claim to a patent on a rectangle with rounded corners. So part of the answer is that the legal system has changed.

Note that while Apple has obviously been influenced by the earlier designs, has admitted to being so, they're not actually making the same thing to the same design. Yes, it's true that a speaker looks similar to a screen, an infra-red emitter to a camera. Most obviously, the on screen calculator is very similar indeed to the physical calculator. But these are different things.

And the most important one:

The allegation about Samsung is not that they made a toaster that looked very like an Apple iPhone. It's that they made a smartphone that looked very like an Apple smartphone.

Exynos said,

Haha I'll give you credit for trying.

But wait, Samsung's fans say, didn't the company itself make a device with a flush-surface screen and a wide black margin? Back in 2006, Engadget described a product Samsung no longer makes: a digital photo frame that looks suspiciously like the iPad, but four years before the iPad, and before the iPhone even.

Well it looks like it from one angle anyways. In reality, the 7 inch digital photo frame wouldn't be mistaken for an iPad at all, and of course, wasn't anything like an iPad in functionality, as the comparison below to the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the design patent it offends indicates.

Apple's D889 design patent does address elements of the face of the iPad that are similar to the minimal face of the minimally functional Samsung photo frame, but the design patent also describes the iPad from the back, corner, sides, and beveled edges, none of which are remotely similar to Samsung's earlier product.

Any other examples you want me to rebuff?

stevan said,

Haha I'll give you credit for trying


Any other examples you want me to rebuff?


You posted: Apple's D889 design patent does address elements of the face of the iPad that are similar to the minimal face of the minimally functional Samsung photo frame, but the design patent also describes the iPad from the back, corner, sides, and beveled edges, none of which are remotely similar to Samsung's earlier product.

So thank you for providing the evidences that the Samsung tablets are far from being a copy of the iPad in any shape or form then. The Samsung tablets are using the same design as the Samsung Photo Frame does and not after how iPads are looking.

Exynos said,

You posted: Apple's D889 design patent does address elements of the face of the iPad that are similar to the minimal face of the minimally functional Samsung photo frame, but the design patent also describes the iPad from the back, corner, sides, and beveled edges, none of which are remotely similar to Samsung's earlier product.

So thank you for providing the evidences that the Samsung tablets are far from being a copy of the iPad in any shape or form then. The Samsung tablets are using the same design as the Samsung Photo Frame does and not after how iPads are looking.

Haha that's all you got from that quote? I thought the RDF was only for Apple fanboys. Let's put it this way, if Samsung tablets didn't copy Apple iPad, there wouldn't be a lawsuit and it wouldn't have gotten as far as it did. Make sense to you?

stevan said,

Haha that's all you got from that quote? I thought the RDF was only for Apple fanboys. Let's put it this way, if Samsung tablets didn't copy Apple iPad, there wouldn't be a lawsuit and it wouldn't have gotten as far as it did. Make sense to you?


So can you explain why the Samsung Photo Frame is not the used design for the Samsung tablets?

Just because Apple thinks they own round corners and a black surface and sues others for that, it doesn't means that others are copying that. It's Apple who thinks that.

Exynos said,

So can you explain why the Samsung Photo Frame is not the used design for the Samsung tablets?

Just because Apple thinks they own round corners and a black surface and sues others for that, it doesn't means that others are copying that. It's Apple who thinks that.

I thought that was debated earlier.

Also, the placement of the single home button and speaker grill. Couple that with the memos and emails by Samsung that came out in court and how they designed their phones prior to the iPhone's release, it's clear they simply copied it's design. Now, whether or not they have a "right to own" their original design is really another debate I never got into. But anyone arguing they didn't copy is being dishonest.

stevan said,

I thought that was debated earlier.


I'm not sure, but do you know the difference by copying and being inspired by something and makes that better?

Exynos said,

I'm not sure, but do you know the difference by copying and being inspired by something and makes that better?

But that's not what Samsung did. They blatantly copied.

Samsung can't even be trusted with confidentiality. Are you really defending them? They're not even crap without the Android OS.

Exynos said,

I'm not sure, but do you know the difference by copying and being inspired by something and makes that better?

Honestly, I don't fully understand it. But I'm sure lawyers at both companies are well aware of it and therefore the lawsuit has gotten this far. Samsung also lost at one point, right?

stevan said,

Honestly, I don't fully understand it. But I'm sure lawyers at both companies are well aware of it and therefore the lawsuit has gotten this far. Samsung also lost at one point, right?


The lawsuit is far from being done. And i think Samsung is going to win this after all as the design patents Apple have is not to defend their ideas (as it's not really their ideas to begin with), but it's to prevent competition.

Exynos said,

The lawsuit is far from being done. And i think Samsung is going to win this after all as the design patents Apple have is not to defend their ideas (as it's not really their ideas to begin with), but it's to prevent competition.

Do you personally believe Samsung copied the iPhone?

Exynos said,

The lawsuit is far from being done. And i think Samsung is going to win this after all as the design patents Apple have is not to defend their ideas (as it's not really their ideas to begin with), but it's to prevent competition.

Who will win the lawsuit can be debated as much as the whole android vs ios argument. But it's very hard to prove that Samsung didn't just blatantly copy Apple by looking at the designs. Everything from the product itself to box, USB chargers.....

Like I quoted already, Samsung didn't copy the iPad and made a toaster, they copied it and made another tablet.

AWilliams87 said,

Do you personally believe Samsung copied the iPhone?

I do believe Samsung have copied something from Apple in the same way as Apple have copied something from others.

Bottom line is that everyone does this in todays business and everyone does this to improve their products. Then someone elses takes that and makes it even better. Then it will go this way all the time.

This is to let the companies drive the competition forward rather than backwards like Apple is doing now.

Exynos said,

I do believe Samsung have copied something from Apple in the same way as Apple have copied something from others.

Bottom line is that everyone does this in todays business and everyone does this to improve their products. Then someone elses takes that and makes it even better. Then it will go this way all the time.

This is to let the companies drive the competition forward rather than backwards like Apple is doing now.


I know they copied something, but I specified the iPhone to be exact. Do you think they copied the iPhone?

AWilliams87 said,

But that's not what Samsung did. They blatantly copied.

For blind Apple fanboys, it's copying, but to everyone else who are open minded, it's called getting inspired by others and to drive the competition forward.

AWilliams87 said,

I know they copied something, but I specified the iPhone to be exact. Do you think they copied the iPhone?

Samsung probably did copy the first iPhone, but that's over 6 years ago, so who would care about that today?

When it's about today, it's actually Apple who are copying others to try and catch up with others just to stay relevant in the market.

Exynos said,

Samsung probably did copy the first iPhone, but that's over 6 years ago, so who would care about that today?

When it's about today, it's actually Apple who are copying others to try and catch up with others just to stay relevant in the market.

Yet you posted designs from 60s that apple copied....really smooth.

You shouldn't call people fanboys just because they have a different opinion. I could have called you a fanboy for being blind and not seeing the similarities in the products in pictures I provided...

stevan said,

Yet you posted designs from 60s that apple copied....really smooth.

You shouldn't call people fanboys just because they have a different opinion. I could have called you a fanboy for being blind and not seeing the similarities in the products in pictures I provided...


It's still a proof that Apple copied designs from others. It's a proof that Apple copies others as much as other copies Apple in different things today.

Bottim line is that everyone copies everyone to make things better today. This is normal practice today and you just have to live with it.

Exynos said,

It's still a proof that Apple copied designs from others .It's a proof that Apple copies others as much as other copies Apple in different things today.

But this is clearly going back to the original argument. It can very easy said that apple used previous products, not protected by design laws, to inspire their products that are in a different category. And it can also be said that Samsung copied those products to create the same exact products. Samsung copied a smartphone to make a smart phone and a tablet to make a tablet...

Exynos said,

Samsung probably did copy the first iPhone, but that's over 6 years ago, so who would care about that today?

When it's about today, it's actually Apple who are copying others to try and catch up with others just to stay relevant in the market.


So what exactly are you debating? You said Samsung copied the iPhone. That being the so, they should lose the case. Are you saying that although they did copy, they shouldn't pay damages?

AWilliams87 said,

So what exactly are you debating? You said Samsung copied the iPhone. That being the so, they should lose the case. Are you saying that although they did copy, they shouldn't pay damages?

The point is why Apple is bothering to sue Samsung to get some devices Samsung isn't making anylonger banned lol.

Apple is wasting money and wasting Samsung's time on nonsense lawsuits.

This is why Apple is ****ing off so many peoples today.

Exynos said,

The point is why Apple is bothering to sue Samsung to get some devices Samsung isn't making anylonger banned lol.

Apple is wasting money and wasting Samsung's time on nonsense lawsuits.

This is why Apple is ****ing off so many peoples today.


Apple is seeking monetary damages from Samsung. The case also dissuades them from trying to copy them in the near future. That isn't a waste of money. One can easily argue Samsung's success comes from their copycat tactics.

AWilliams87 said,

Apple is seeking monetary damages from Samsung. The case also dissuades them from trying to copy them in the near future. That isn't a waste of money. One can easily argue Samsung's success comes from their copycat tactics.

In the same way as Apple got inspired by Sony and copied many of their phone designs?

And no, if you haven't got it yet, Samsung isn't making any phones / tablets anylonger that are inspired by Apple, so why seek money punishment for something that happened many years ago?

Do you still don't see why this is wasting Samsung's and others time?

Exynos said,

In the same way as Apple got inspired by Sony and copied many of their phone designs?

And no, if you haven't got it yet, Samsung isn't making any phones / tablets anylonger that are inspired by Apple, so why seek money punishment for something that happened many years ago?

Do you still don't see why this is wasting Samsung's and others time?


Once the statute of limitations for damages collected on patent infringement has not expired, you can still seek money. Also, they are still making phones which are still a copy of Apple's original design, albeit less so now, even down to the one, single physical button.

This was the crap they made prior to 2007: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money...arge-gallery-horizontal.jpg

This is how they copied the iPhone since: http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-...amsung-iphone-3-640x405.png

Even now, you can still clearly tell the two devices are similar in approach: http://cms.mobile88.com/news/w...y-s4-vs-apple-iphone-5s.jpg

AWilliams87 said,

Even now, you can still clearly tell the two devices are similar in approach: http://cms.mobile88.com/news/w...y-s4-vs-apple-iphone-5s.jpg

So tell us what Samsung have copied from Apple there when Apple doesn't own the rights to rounded corners, black surface, icon with a telephone on, icons with colors, icons displayed on different places on the screen, a home button, a speaker grill on top of the phone?

Seriously, you can't be that blind or Apple manupulated?

EDIT: You are one of the reasons why we don't like peoples who use Apple products as they are the most brainwashed and manipulated persons to bite on Apples propaganda EVER.

Exynos said,

So tell us what Samsung have copied from Apple there when Apple doesn't own the rights to rounded corners, black surface, icon with a telephone on, icons with colors, icons displayed on different places on the screen, a home button, a speaker grill on top of the phone?

Seriously, you can't be that blind or Apple manupulated?

EDIT: You are one of the reasons why we don't like peoples who use Apple products as they are the most brainwashed and manipulated persons to bite on Apples propaganda EVER.


They don't need to "own the rights" of a home button to know that placing it in the same configuration as the iPhone, while defaulting all other real functionality to the touchscreen, is clearly a copy of what the iPhone did. Samsung didn't make phones like that prior to the iPhone becoming successful.

http://todayilearned.co.uk/wp-...fore-and-after-iphones.jpeg

Lets get real. I know that you know they copied the iPhone and they're still similar to some respect. Because of your bias, you'll just lie about it. Unfortunately for you, the U.S. legal system disagrees with your fibs, so Samsung lost.

EDIT to your EDIT: I don't own an Apple product...

Edited by AWilliams87, Nov 16 2013, 9:29pm :

AWilliams87 said,

They don't need to "own the rights" of a home button to know that placing it in the same configuration as the iPhone, while defaulting all other real functionality to the touchscreen, is clearly a copy of what the iPhone did. Samsung didn't make phones like that prior to the iPhone becoming successful.

http://todayilearned.co.uk/wp-...fore-and-after-iphones.jpeg

Lets get real. I know that you know they copied the iPhone and they're still similar to some respect. Because of your bias, you'll just lie about it. Unfortunately for you, the U.S. legal system disagrees with your fibs, so Samsung lost.

EDIT to your EDIT: I don't own an Apple product...


You can link as many stupid Apple propaganda pictures of how Samsung makes their phones because it doesn't change the facts that Samsung got inspired by Apple in the exact same way as Apple got inspired by Sony's phones.

No, you can say whatever you want, but as long as the home button is not round and as long as Apple doesn't have the rights to own a home button, it's not copying in any ways. And as long as Apple doesn't owns the right of having a phone picture in their icons, then everyone else can use that no matter what. PERIOD.

Phones / PDA's already back in 2000 had icons with a phone in it and those phones had round corners and also had a speaker grill in the same place as they are today.

So if Samsung copied Apple here, then Apple copied everyone bits for bits in and out. It's that simple.

Exynos said,

....

I'm reading conflicting arguments from you. Have Samsung copied or not copied Apple? You say "...as long as Apple doesn't have the rights to own a home button, it's not copying...", but simultaneously implied they did copy in another paragraph.

"as long as Apple doesn't owns the right of having a phone picture in their icons, then everyone else can use that no matter what. PERIOD." But that isn't the discussion here. You can copy as much as you please, you'll just get sued. Nonetheless, this is about whether they copied or not, not whether they can or can't. If they did, which you said they did and can, then they should pay damages. It's that simple.

Apple designed a phone which made them billions, and Samsung looking to capitalize on that, designed their new phone to look extraordinarily similar to Apple's phone. Design patent laws dictate that for the patent holder to win their case, the competing product has to look "substantially similar". They clearly do, so they lost. Is the U.S. legal system "blind or Apple manupulated" also? There's a reason why knockoff bags and clothes are banned.

Mr.XXIV said,
At the end of the day, Apple has an independent ecosystem, unlike Android and WP and used-to-be Blackberry.

You do know what independent means, don't you?

The last time I looked Android, WP, iOS and Blackberry all have independent ecosystems.

AWilliams87 said,

I'm reading conflicting arguments from you. Have Samsung copied or not copied Apple? You say "...as long as Apple doesn't have the rights to own a home button, it's not copying...", but simultaneously implied they did copy in another paragraph.

"as long as Apple doesn't owns the right of having a phone picture in their icons, then everyone else can use that no matter what. PERIOD." But that isn't the discussion here. You can copy as much as you please, you'll just get sued. Nonetheless, this is about whether they copied or not, not whether they can or can't. If they did, which you said they did and can, then they should pay damages. It's that simple.

Apple designed a phone which made them billions, and Samsung looking to capitalize on that, designed their new phone to look extraordinarily similar to Apple's phone. Design patent laws dictate that for the patent holder to win their case, the competing product has to look "substantially similar". They clearly do, so they lost. Is the U.S. legal system "blind or Apple manupulated" also? There's a reason why knockoff bags and clothes are banned.


As long as Apple doesn't have the rights over round corners or icons with a phone picture in it, they can't sue others over it. So why are you saying that they have to expect to be sued when they don't have any rights to sue over that when they don't have the rights over round corners or the icon with the phone picture in it (just to take an example)?

You are saying Samsung is copying Apple and should be sued over it. So Apple must have the rights over round corners and icons with some pictures in them then, right?

If no, then why are Apple suing Samsung?

EDIT: Earlier someone said that before something had to be a copy of an iPhone / iPad is if the front, sides and the backside was indentical. However, the first Samsung Galaxy S phone is far from being a copy of the iPhone 3GS then, as the Galaxy S looks totally different from the sides and on the backside.

Edited by Exynos, Nov 16 2013, 11:03pm :

Exynos said,
...

After re-reading some of your post, it dawned on me you don't understand how this works. You don't need to have the rights to anything for something to be protected. If I make a novel TV set and have no "rights" to any of the individual elements, then you later come around after witnessing the success I had with the product, and develop your TV set which is substantially similar in look and feel, that is illegal in the United States. Whether or not I have "rights" is irrelevant. I can sue you and I would win.

AWilliams87 said,

After re-reading some of your post, it dawned on me you don't understand how this works. You don't need to have the rights to anything for something to be protected. If I make a novel TV set and have no "rights" to any of the individual elements, then you later come around after witnessing the success I had with the product, and develop your TV set which is substantially similar in look and feel, that is illegal in the United States. Whether or not I have "rights" is irrelevant. I can sue you and I would win.

Ahh yeah, it's America where everyone can sue you for nothing. Point taken.

stevan said,
For those of you that deny Samsung is copying apple I'll just leave this here:

http://www.digitalfilmtree.com...y-samsung-is-copying-apple/

haha. Every lame iFan tries to show that same picture. First, it's all made in China so it all looks alike. The white box? OEMs have been using white boxes for years and now it's copying? The 30 pin connector? There has been an open source one for a while now which is the one Samsung used. How about the fact everyone has been using. Small connector for years and now Apple is?

What is great about invention is there is always a better way. Apple can't seem to understand that their way is not the best. they stole Xerox way and made it better. Microsoft came and took Apple idea and made if better and had the better success. Apple answer...suing. they took Sonys Walkman idea and made it better. It was so much better that no one could improve it...YET. Then iPhone and iPad. Apple again took ideas and made them better. now Samsung is taking those ideas nod making them better.

It's not copying. It's evolution. Today's original inventions like cars, airplanes and tires all started as great ideas. Technology has improved them. You don't own an idea. You on the reality of how you made it possible. But ideas are improved everyday and this who make them better aren't always the person who had the original idea.

Take that lame photo and post it on your wall and put a Dunce hat on it.

Mr.XXIV said,

You're full of crap. How the hell is Apple playing catchup? What happened to Samsung trying to take Passbook? HTC Fingerprint still doesn't mean anything?

How is it that a phone with has less cores and RAM and STILL outperforms mane of the Androids with bigger specs?

Why is it that there are so many phones out there, especially Samsung's list of Galaxies, and you think Apple cares when they only have 8 phones that did better than the rest for so long?

You're an utter trip. I swear. How about you worry about the fact that there are 100s of Android companies and there's only 1 Apple company. Don't get me started on all the Windows Tablet and Phone manufactures. It's pathetic.

is that the best u can do? My Galaxy Note 3 has 3GB of RAM because I can use more apps on the screen. Because it has a full hd display, because it has powerful useful tools, so I can take better pictures,....and no it doesn't lag even with 10 apps open I can play a full had video and it won't drop frame. iPhone faster? No. Benches mean jack. Put them side by side and the Note kills the 5S. More features need more power. U stick with ur one trick pony.

stevan said,

Wonder why Apple isn't getting sued then?

because so people like to compete and when where it counts. It's call the market....not in a courtroom. Not everyone is a sue happy bully.

AWilliams87 said,

Once the statute of limitations for damages collected on patent infringement has not expired, you can still seek money. Also, they are still making phones which are still a copy of Apple's original design, albeit less so now, even down to the one, single physical button.

This was the crap they made prior to 2007: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money...arge-gallery-horizontal.jpg

This is how they copied the iPhone since: http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-...amsung-iphone-3-640x405.png

Even now, you can still clearly tell the two devices are similar in approach: http://cms.mobile88.com/news/w...y-s4-vs-apple-iphone-5s.jpg


AWilliams87 said,

At least you're recognizing that they copied Apple, although you euphemized it, as opposed to others who simply deny.

This would be a good point if you or apple claimed everything thing they did was without precedent. Sadly, everyone copies. The question is can you claim you invented and own the concept of rounded corners when there are centuries of prior art. The answer is clearly no

Except Apple doesn't really copy like you'd think. When they throw things into their services on iOS or OS X, they do it with the help of the company they buy knowing they already give exceptional service. That's where Android tends to fail. They don't give well services and apps in the long run because they try to do everything quick & dirty.

Just like HTC's Fingerprint Scanner.

Mr.XXIV said,
Except Apple doesn't really copy like you'd think. When they throw things into their services on iOS or OS X, they do it with the help of the company they buy knowing they already give exceptional service. That's where Android tends to fail. They don't give well services and apps in the long run because they try to do everything quick & dirty.

Just like HTC's Fingerprint Scanner.

Really? Then why do all the best phones all use Google's Services? Why is it if Apple is so great, their services are only available to iOS? I mean, if you feel you have the best, wouldn't you share it with everyone?

Google quick and dirty? You mean like how Apple Maps was? They bought the company, like you say they do. They rush a half-arsed product to the market, just like they did with the iPhone 4 and the 4S with Siri. Siri was half-baked rush job. They bought the company just the year before and took their app off the market and make it into the iOS UI and it was terrible and slow. Though not as bad as S-Voice. Then last year they bought the company that makes biometric sensors and they shoved one into the 5S. How good does it work? Its works no better than readers have all the time. They simply were able to put it into a button vs having to slide your finger. But on other products, the reader is used to sign into websites and other applications, not to just open the lock screen. So I guess that isn't a rushed product?

What about PING? Apple so quick tpo rush into he Facebook craze. They expected it to just take off because so many people had Apple products they would just "magically" use it. WRONG! It failed and they pulled it after the first year. RUSHED!!!!

Please show me a service Apple has that is so great. iTunes is the slowess most crappy media management app in history. At first you were forced to use it until they did iCloud. Whats so great about iCloud? NOTHING. Box, SkyDrive and many others are so much better. Even Google Drive is better. I better Google+ which was a rushed service is doing better than PING. Oh wait...where is PING Again?

Again please show me where Android services are a failure? Android is 80% of the world market. Must mean people like it. Android is 60% of the USA. Must mean we all like it. Why do we like it? Because Android offers something for EVERYONE like Windows does and platforms that offer such do better. Since they hve more support that means the companys that own them can't sit on their butts and milk the platform without doing something, like Apple I now.

Do you think HTC's fingerprint reader wasn't planned?

Here is what you don't know, but assume like all fans. You assume that just because APple releases it first, it must have only been their idea. FYI, the company that made the sensor APple is using, is the same company that made it for Android. So how do you know that while APple was talking to this company, that company didn't tell them that hey, HTC and others are considering buying readers, maybe you can rush and be first? YOU EVER THOUGHT OF THAT?

How about this fact...Apple like Samsung is a licensee of ARM technology. ARM already had a roadmap to bring 64bit chips to mobile device. Since Apple designs their own chip based off ARM technologies, they simply yet again RUSHED TO BE FIRST. Look at all the problems it caused. I refused to even use my iPhone 4 until apps received updates because I got so tired of them crashing and freezing. Yet they are suppose to be compatible. Many were not. If I install a 32bit app in a 64bit version of Windows, it works exactly as it did when I was only using a 32bit OS. RUSHED.

Would you like me to go on? Its so amazing how you all seem to forget how many times Apple has had failed products. Based on my history...NO PRODUCT Apple has ever made has been as successful as iPod. NONE OF THEM. The Mac is a failure because it too them 28 years to sell 128M when Windows OEM's sold that many PC's in a single year after the release of Windows 95. How long ago was that? Much shorter than 28 years.

The best thing about doing a service from scratch, is that you can brag about how you planned ad design the platform from the ground up. And that where you had issues you worked them out and now you are the top dog.

When you buy other peoples stuff and claim it as yours, and you take credit for their hard work. That makes you a liar, a bigot, a hypocrite and a low life of a company.

The Mac and the iPod and its siblings would all be nothing but worthless pieces of crap if it wasn't for company's like Sony, Samsung and others who actually make products that are top on the market.

You really can sit there with a straight face and say, buying other stuff is better than making your own? Hahahahahaha!!!!

Let me ask you a frank question...which set of parents do you think are the happiest in this scenario...2 parents who natural produced a kid and raise him to be successful like Bill Gates parents for example? Or a set of parents who paid someone to have a kid and they grew up to be successful? Though both will be happy, which one you think is happier? Once you think that, tell me why your post makes no sense.

TechieXP said,

Let me ask you a frank question...which set of parents do you think are the happiest in this scenario...2 parents who natural produced a kid and raise him to be successful like Bill Gates parents for example? Or a set of parents who paid someone to have a kid and they grew up to be successful? Though both will be happy, which one you think is happier? Once you think that, tell me why your post makes no sense.

This is now the most ridiculous thing you ever wrote. And this is after you clAimed you're rich and have two companies, and when you wrote how making a smaller LCD is easy bc all you have to do is shrink the large one.

Hahahaha

stevan said,

This is now the most ridiculous thing you ever wrote. And this is after you clAimed you're rich and have two companies, and when you wrote how making a smaller LCD is easy bc all you have to do is shrink the large one.

Hahahaha

I do own 2 companies. Never said I was rich. We are a $7M a year company. Always busy. We do structured cabling and more. Making an LCD smaller is easy. Why is it do hard? Explain how since you THINK you have all the answers?

You take a big screen and you resize it to a smaller size. It doesn't take brand new R&D. The problem is Apple choosing non-standard IPS screens. They aren't hard to produce. What they are is a pain to produce. Machine hav to be reconfigured to accept non-standard resolutions. They have to make an LCD that packs in the pixels Apple wants into such a small space.

Such a spec requires a SLOWER process. So if you cant get your hands on said product on day one, SUCKS FOR YOU. Scream at Apple for bring stupid.

Then again, what does your above have to do with this? Nothing.
Oh and now I will say it...I am rich by typical standards. But I am still young at heart even tho I am likely much older than you.

Butlike a typical iFan, when you can't win an argument, you stop to suc lame measures. Sad really.

I know you cringe when I blast Apple. I blast Microsoft and Samsung and others if they deserve it. For a time in the 80's I hated Microsoft because of their terrible business practices. Because of them a company that I did work for was closed du tto being forced off the market.

Yeah Phil, im sure Samsung's willingness to go after the lower end in developing markets (something Apple turned its nose up at and effectively snubbing anyone not in the US or EU), or stiff competition from competitors who were rapidly innovating to bring quality competing products to the market had nothing to do with it.

Wapoz said,
Yeah Phil, im sure Samsung's willingness to go after the lower end in developing markets (something Apple turned its nose up at and effectively snubbing anyone not in the US or EU), or stiff competition from competitors who were rapidly innovating to bring quality competing products to the market had nothing to do with it.

Samsung makes it money from the top end.

Mr.XXIV said,
All the Galaxies from 2009 to the Galaxy Express 2 and you think Phil is lying?

Yea because we all know Apple invented the rounded rectangle >_>

Mr.XXIV said,
All the Galaxies from 2009 to the Galaxy Express 2 and you think Phil is lying?

They also copied Apple's pricing structure. That, along with their copied S-line phones, is the only reason they're so profitable in the smartphone market.

SharpGreen said,

Yea because we all know Apple invented the rounded rectangle >_>

There are 8 iPhones, 2 now at the same time.

There are at least 30-40 Galaxy devices.

What the heffing cupcake-sized duck does the "rounded rectangle" have anything to do with this?

Mr.XXIV said,

There are 8 iPhones, 2 now at the same time.

There are at least 30-40 Galaxy devices.

What the heffing cupcake-sized duck does the "rounded rectangle" have anything to do with this?


Well IMO that's about the only similarity. Everything else about Samsung phones looks different to me.

AWilliams87 said,

They also copied Apple's pricing structure. That, along with their copied S-line phones, is the only reason they're so profitable in the smartphone market.

come on they both copied 2001: Space odessy lol...

AWilliams87 said,

And in your pic, you can't see the similarities?

I see the round corners, icons on the display and the color black as similarities.

Again, when did Apple get right to own round corners, icons displayed on a display and the color black?

Edited by Exynos, Nov 16 2013, 3:17pm :

Exynos said,

I see the round corners and icons on the display as similarities.

Again, when did Apple get right to own round corners and icons displayed on a display?


Also, the placement of the single home button and speaker grill. Couple that with the memos and emails by Samsung that came out in court and how they designed their phones prior to the iPhone's release, it's clear they simply copied it's design. Now, whether or not they have a "right to own" their original design is really another debate I never got into. But anyone arguing they didn't copy is being dishonest.

I would go even further to say they also copied Apple's business model when it comes to smartphones as well. But many companies are trying to copy that as well.

They may share certain features, but saying they look alike is plain idiotic and if you think you're buying an "Apple-like" product when buying a Samsun, then that is even worse.

Its funny because before Apple and Samsung started competing in the smartphone arena, everyone accepted the fact that Samsung shamelessly copied and followed everyone. Especially Sony.

But people's bias for Apple is so hardcore that they can't admit the obvious.

I still bought Samsung TVs, computer monitors, portable CD players, etc,etc. If anything they have shown to be good at copying areas that are strong and innovating in areas that sell well to consumers. Like the Note line of smartphones, for example. Sure everyone has always done this, but I bet many people who are putting out a fight in defense of their beloved Samsung have only recently become this way because of their bias against Apple. Samsung became Apple's underdog, and people like to route for the underdog.

AWilliams87 said,

anyone arguing they didn't copy is being dishonest.

I would go even further to say they also copied Apple's business model when it comes to smartphones as well. But many companies are trying to copy that as well.

No one has ever bought a phone because of rounded corners of icons, the placement of a home button, the placement of a speaker grill, or how a home screen looks*. Ever.

Let's be brutally honest, apple didn't invent or promote the use of rounded corners, home buttons, their business model, or anything else. They didn't perfect it, and those things do not define what people love most about iphones - they aren't even what makes/made the iphone unique.

Why? Because the Samsung phones don't look, or feel like iphones, and no one anywhere has ever been confused in to thinking any Samsung device is an iphone - primarily because it's a fundamentally different device that has the words SAMSUNG emblazoned across the top of every single handset.

Has Samsung's phones diluted the Apple brand? Possibly, but that's how an open market works. Someone comes along with something cool. Someone else comes along with something cooler, and people forget about the first people. That's not a bad thing. Additionally, Apple's constant bickering like a child about rounded corners, and years of focusing on this court case instead of innovating has done more to harm their reputation than anything else. That, and overcharging for tat.