Samsung's new Android UI looks a lot like Microsoft's modern UI

Samsung made a ton of announcements on Monday as part of its CES 2014 presence. One of them was the reveal of their new 12.2 inch tablets, the Galaxy NotePRO and the Galaxy TabPro. The big tablets, along with other upcoming Galaxy Tab products, will include a new user interface that looks very familar for owners of Windows 8 and Windows Phone devices.

According to Samsung's press release, the interface is called Magazine UX which the company says has been optimized for the larger screens. It says:

The UX enables them to organize their favorite content in an easy-to-use dashboard with automatic feed or news updates and then quickly access the most frequently used apps for a more comfortable reading experience. By utilizing a screen size that is more comparable to traditional magazine-sized material, content is easier to view in its original format when reading digital magazines or e-books.

The similarity between Magazine UX and the Modern UI used by Microsoft's newest operating systems was not lost on TrustedReviews. The website asked Shoneel Kolhatkar, Samsung’s Senior Director of Product Planning, at CES 2013 about the look of the two interfaces, but he seemed to brush off the comparisons, saying, "I don’t think it matters [that it looks like Windows] ... “As long as consumers like it, they can compare it to Windows or compare it to something else.”

We have contacted Microsoft to see if they wish to comment on Samsung's new tablet UI and how close it looks to Windows 8 and Windows Phone.

Via: TrustedReviews | Image via Samsung

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Sony: 4.2 million PlayStation 4 consoles sold as of Dec. 28

Next Story

Sony announces Windows 8.1 VAIO Fit 11A Flip PC notebook

110 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I think this is good for MS, since the people will buy this, they will get used to it then they will buy Win8 products since they got used to their tablets UI

We have contacted Microsoft to see if they wish to comment on Samsung's new tablet UI and how close it looks to Windows 8 and Windows Phone.

So basically ****stirring and tale-telling then.

Looks a lot like metro with tiles. Poor use of space on the left.
Android fanboys who hated Metro UI will now call this innovation.
*drops the mic

That's terrible. I'm not a fanboy but I like using android, and I don't want this. Luckily it isn't the only option.

Riva said,

Android fanboys who hated Metro UI will now call this innovation.

Really? I find no one saying this. In fact, lots do not like TW at all.

MS is unable to sue Samsung mainly because MS does not invented the style.

The use of Futura style of font for the title and the use of borderless buttons is anything but new. I remember others using this kind of style even before Zune. In fact, i even remember that MS used in some products a similar style.

Sheesh.

This is interesting because of the perceived 'hatred' of Windows 8.

First people screamed that 'flat' was horrible, and then as Apple and Google flattened their Web and OS interfaces, flat became Ok.

Then people screamed about the new Start Screen and Modern Apps, and we have HTC and Samsung recreating it on Android. If you look, you can see Win8/Modern UI styles used on most websites, in a lot of Apps and even in other OSes.

Samsung is the big name in Android right now, so that is what makes this interesting.

PS Microsoft is never going to sue Samsung over this, and probably thinks it is a compliment, as they should.

I guess Google and Samsung feel entitled to use this modern UI since MSFT is getting paid some $$ every time an Android device is sold (tanks to patents). I love my Lumia but I find it funny how MSFT makes more money from Android than WP8 devices. But, you know what, this might backfire on Samsung. I can see a commercial now saying, "If you like this design and user interface, why settle for a impostor?"

Amen. The stock Android UI looks absolutely nothing like any of Microsoft's metro design. Get a clue, please.

didn't every tech enthusiast( minus the ones that liked the flat interface that msft implemented) and msft haters state that metro was ugly and it would never catch on. and yet here we are watching apple with ios7 taking cues to become more flat and with Samsung also jumping on this. and I can already see people praising Samsung for the flat UI

I'd have to use it to determine if it is a copy. If it works like Modern UI, it's a copy. And it will probably be a little cumbersome though there is not Desktop to ever break the UX.

If it's a more pleasant and usable UI/UX, it will just make Android tablets more appealing.

If you're going to copy a UI paradigm don't copy the most hideous UX paradigm on the market. It's a good job installing a custom launcher on Android devices is so easy really.

Javik said,
If you're going to copy a UI paradigm don't copy the most hideous UX paradigm on the market. It's a good job installing a custom launcher on Android devices is so easy really.

You sound mad.

That style of UI works fine on tablets...

Looks almost as bad as the Modern UI as well. Just as much wasted space in favor of giant tile icons. Samsung's UI team just gets worse and worse with every new release.

AJerman said,
Looks almost as bad as the Modern UI as well. Just as much wasted space in favor of giant tile icons. Samsung's UI team just gets worse and worse with every new release.

i see this a lot, this wasted apace point. How much info do you need on one screen? Isn't it better to have tiles showing snippets of info better than either loads of info or a sea of icons? To me it is, and with win 8 i make the 'icon only' tiles small, the tiles that give me some info normal and the ones I'm most bothered about large sizes, it seems to serve me well and at a glance of my start screen i can see a lot of useful info without being overloaded OR presented with equidistant static icons, which i think is better, for me, in my opinion of course.

I don't have high resolution screens for my health (though it is easier on your eyes, so I suppose I do somewhat, haha). Being that I actually use my computer to do actual work, I like to get as much information on my screen as possible. Be it all the icons I can need without having to scroll all over the place to find them, or not having massive padding and fonts so that more information can be used at one time. I don't mean that sarcastically either, if all I did was browse the web and post on Facebook, the Modern UI would probably be great, but I have a job in IT and don't care about questionably pretty over functionality.

Why is everyone here so interested in dumbing down computing? Why would I WANT to give up useful space? Remember how people complained about the sidebar on Vista because of their precious screen real estate? Now the start screen is basically the same as what the side bar was envisioned as, but full screen and even more wasteful, and now it's welcomed with open arms?

What is important to me in computing, which is optimal use of space without things being ridiculously small and overloading like you say, hasn't changed. It's the users who were whining about desktop real estate 5 years ago that are now praising the massively space wasting Modern UI that are singing a new song now that confuses me.

But then, let me give MS credit. The start screen has been designed to allow you to make icons small, like you say. I could have it entirely full of small icons and fit a hundred some icons on one screen if I really wanted to. It's the overall Modern UI feel, and especially on a lot of poorly designed apps that really waste the space. Like when you open a news program and it fits 9 articles on your ENTIRE screen because they are each in their own square with a font size of 36 and each headline is 5 lines like with 2 words per line (eg ESPN's app is a good example of this, or was... haven't looked at it for a while and I think they did improve it a little).

I do have to disagree with glancing at the start screen and seeing a lot of useful info though. While I'm pleasantly surprised how much better 8.1 is and I've embraced using it for the time being, I've found live tiles to be just as useless as always, mainly for the lack of useful live tiles. I don't think I have a single live tile that actually gives me useful information at a glance other than maybe the weather tile. Most just flip around on some pictures or a VERY brief snippet of text (like 5 words) and you'd have to sit there and stare at it rotating through each item to get any useful info from a "glance". Or you could just click it and see all the information at once. Live tiles have yet to prove to me their usefulness in anything other than eye candy, which further leads to my opinion of wasted space.

Additionally, it's not like we didn't already have (what I consider to be better) solutions to "info at a glance". The side bars in their time, apps like Rainmeter and Conky, etc. All of these provide just as much, if not FAR more information, and are incredibly customizable.

In my opinion, the Modern UI will pick up more steam when they stop making it look like a toy and make it utilize space more efficiently and work more seamlessly. I've convinced myself to use 8.1 on my home system due to compatibility issues with some peripherals, but the only reason I like it is because of how much of the Modern UI you can turn off from being default. I VERY rarely find myself using anything in the Modern UI. If I need to launch an app, I press the windows key and start typing then press enter. I think the only Modern apps I use with any consistency are incredibly simple apps like weather apps. Even then I find myself preferring using the web, again, because I can get a massive amount more information easily readable.

I went off on a bit of a rant as I wait for a bunch of stuff to download, but of course to each their own. I've warmed up to Windows 8.1 a little more recently, but I still can't help but think the Modern UI is absolutely awful and the worst thing to come out of MS since Bob (actually, startlingly similar in their dumbing down of the OS).

AJerman said,
I don't have high resolution screens for my health (though it is easier on your eyes, so I suppose I do somewhat, haha). Being that I actually use my computer to do actual work, I like to get as much information on my screen as possible. Be it all the icons I can need without having to scroll all over the place to find them, or not having massive padding and fonts so that more information can be used at one time. I don't mean that sarcastically either, if all I did was browse the web and post on Facebook, the Modern UI would probably be great, but I have a job in IT and don't care about questionably pretty over functionality.

Why is everyone here so interested in dumbing down computing? Why would I WANT to give up useful space? Remember how people complained about the sidebar on Vista because of their precious screen real estate? Now the start screen is basically the same as what the side bar was envisioned as, but full screen and even more wasteful, and now it's welcomed with open arms?

What is important to me in computing, which is optimal use of space without things being ridiculously small and overloading like you say, hasn't changed. It's the users who were whining about desktop real estate 5 years ago that are now praising the massively space wasting Modern UI that are singing a new song now that confuses me.

But then, let me give MS credit. The start screen has been designed to allow you to make icons small, like you say. I could have it entirely full of small icons and fit a hundred some icons on one screen if I really wanted to. It's the overall Modern UI feel, and especially on a lot of poorly designed apps that really waste the space. Like when you open a news program and it fits 9 articles on your ENTIRE screen because they are each in their own square with a font size of 36 and each headline is 5 lines like with 2 words per line (eg ESPN's app is a good example of this, or was... haven't looked at it for a while and I think they did improve it a little).

I do have to disagree with glancing at the start screen and seeing a lot of useful info though. While I'm pleasantly surprised how much better 8.1 is and I've embraced using it for the time being, I've found live tiles to be just as useless as always, mainly for the lack of useful live tiles. I don't think I have a single live tile that actually gives me useful information at a glance other than maybe the weather tile. Most just flip around on some pictures or a VERY brief snippet of text (like 5 words) and you'd have to sit there and stare at it rotating through each item to get any useful info from a "glance". Or you could just click it and see all the information at once. Live tiles have yet to prove to me their usefulness in anything other than eye candy, which further leads to my opinion of wasted space.

Additionally, it's not like we didn't already have (what I consider to be better) solutions to "info at a glance". The side bars in their time, apps like Rainmeter and Conky, etc. All of these provide just as much, if not FAR more information, and are incredibly customizable.

In my opinion, the Modern UI will pick up more steam when they stop making it look like a toy and make it utilize space more efficiently and work more seamlessly. I've convinced myself to use 8.1 on my home system due to compatibility issues with some peripherals, but the only reason I like it is because of how much of the Modern UI you can turn off from being default. I VERY rarely find myself using anything in the Modern UI. If I need to launch an app, I press the windows key and start typing then press enter. I think the only Modern apps I use with any consistency are incredibly simple apps like weather apps. Even then I find myself preferring using the web, again, because I can get a massive amount more information easily readable.

I went off on a bit of a rant as I wait for a bunch of stuff to download, but of course to each their own. I've warmed up to Windows 8.1 a little more recently, but I still can't help but think the Modern UI is absolutely awful and the worst thing to come out of MS since Bob (actually, startlingly similar in their dumbing down of the OS).

i can see your point, but to me too much info on one single screen (as opposed to little info/drill into for more) is a pain, i also work in IT and when actually working on something definitely prefer more info (like in photoshop or visual studio, you need all tools and code available to use, not hidden away). But that's when actually doing something, i feel the dashboard style home screen is far better for the inital screen

Really, why all the hate? Samsung didn't copied W8 UI. Maybe Modern UI was an inspiration, but isn't it what happens all the time? I mean, someone create something nice, other companies start creating similar stuff, but with it's own personality. I don't understand why people still rage about it.

Apple users hate it, and they got it with their iOS7.
Android users hate it, and Samsung will bring it to them ...

MDboyz said,
Apple users hate it, and they got it with their iOS7.
Android users hate it, and Samsung will bring it to them ...

Except that IO7 doesn't look anything like Metro. Never saw an iphone with tiles on it.

stevan said,

Except that IO7 doesn't look anything like Metro. Never saw an iphone with tiles on it.

Take Metro. Round off a couple corners. Use gaudy colors. Add a ton of inconsistencies and bugs in the UI. And you have iOS7.

Edited by WhatTheSchmidt, Jan 7 2014, 7:07pm :

WhatTheSchmidt said,

Take Metro. Round off a couple corners. Use gaudy colors. Add a ton of inconsistencies and bugs in the UI. And you have iOS7.

Again, want to show me tiles on an iphone?

stevan said,

Again, want to show me tiles on an iphone?

OK, it is not an iPhone but I have an iPod touch so it is basically the same thing. But I get a few, limited number of icons such as calendar and clock showing updated information.

But you are taking one specific item and using it to claim that iOS is not copying a number of other elements of a design language.

WhatTheSchmidt said,

OK, it is not an iPhone but I have an iPod touch so it is basically the same thing. But I get a few, limited number of icons such as calendar and clock showing updated information.

But you are taking one specific item and using it to claim that iOS is not copying a number of other elements of a design language.

You just used the example of clock and calendar showing updates to say that the rest of the OS copies Metro. Yet you're saying I'm going into specifics. Haha.

stevan said,

You just used the example of clock and calendar showing updates to say that the rest of the OS copies Metro. Yet you're saying I'm going into specifics. Haha.

You asked for an example of a live tile, so I gave you one. I did not say that two icons make the iOS UI design a copy of Metro.

WhatTheSchmidt said,

You asked for an example of a live tile, so I gave you one. I did not say that two icons make the iOS UI design a copy of Metro.

Since when is a tile an icon?

stevan said,

Since when is a tile an icon?

Call it a flufly if you want. Just because you want to call one thing an icon and the very same thing tile does not make them different. They both provide live, interactive information. I may even say the iOS version is more interactive since the clock will actually show the hands moving. Of course, Apple keeps that API to themselves (didn't MS get taken to court over that?), but the functionality is still there.

WhatTheSchmidt said,

Call it a flufly if you want. Just because you want to call one thing an icon and the very same thing tile does not make them different. They both provide live, interactive information. I may even say the iOS version is more interactive since the clock will actually show the hands moving. Of course, Apple keeps that API to themselves (didn't MS get taken to court over that?), but the functionality is still there.

You must immediately do some research on what a metro tile is and what functionality it offers. A tile is much more than just an icon, and you're not giving Microsoft any credit with what you said. Apple applied some functionality to two icons and somehow they're copying Metro. In fact iOS 7 is very far from Metro.

An icon is never going to be a tile.

stevan said,

You must immediately do some research on what a metro tile is and what functionality it offers. A tile is much more than just an icon, and you're not giving Microsoft any credit with what you said. Apple applied some functionality to two icons and somehow they're copying Metro. In fact iOS 7 is very far from Metro.

An icon is never going to be a tile.

Somebody who consistently derides Win8, and likely has never gone near a Win8 computer trying to tell me that I don't know what a tile is. Wow.

The flufly that Apple uses is more interactive in that it is animated in ways that fluflies in Win8 are not. A Win8 flufly can only be updated on a periodic schedule (at most 15 mintues) if not running by a background task. And if the app is not running, you cannot get the clock animation in iOS7. But other than that, an Apple flufly is the same as a Metro flufly. But as I wrote earlier but you conveniently ignored, there is much more to Apple's copy of Metro than two fluflies.

WhatTheSchmidt said,

Somebody who consistently derides Win8, and likely has never gone near a Win8 computer trying to tell me that I don't know what a tile is. Wow.

The flufly that Apple uses is more interactive in that it is animated in ways that fluflies in Win8 are not. A Win8 flufly can only be updated on a periodic schedule (at most 15 mintues) if not running by a background task. And if the app is not running, you cannot get the clock animation in iOS7. But other than that, an Apple flufly is the same as a Metro flufly. But as I wrote earlier but you conveniently ignored, there is much more to Apple's copy of Metro than two fluflies.

Sorry but I do have to question your credibility when you compare round icons that are spread accross the screen with tiles that populate the entire screen.

It's like saying all phones are the same bc they make phone calls.

stevan said,

Sorry but I do have to question your credibility when you compare round icons that are spread accross the screen with tiles that populate the entire screen.

It's like saying all phones are the same bc they make phone calls.

Not all phones are the same because they make phone calls, but if they make phone calls, they are phones.

And if an icon spreads across the entire screen and a tile that populates across the entire screen, what is the difference between them? A set of icons are arranged in a grid across the screen, while tiles are arranged in a grid across the screen.

But then again, you prefer to ignore the many similarities between iOS7 UI and Metro, and just focus on tiles, even though they are the same damn thing. Just because you repeat the lie that there is no similarity between what iOS has for fluflies and what Metro uses as fluflies, does not make it true.

WhatTheSchmidt said,

Not all phones are the same because they make phone calls, but if they make phone calls, they are phones.

And if an icon spreads across the entire screen and a tile that populates across the entire screen, what is the difference between them? A set of icons are arranged in a grid across the screen, while tiles are arranged in a grid across the screen.

But then again, you prefer to ignore the many similarities between iOS7 UI and Metro, and just focus on tiles, even though they are the same damn thing. Just because you repeat the lie that there is no similarity between what iOS has for fluflies and what Metro uses as fluflies, does not make it true.

So now we are going to debate other things? This all started with this quote of yours:

Take Metro. Round off a couple corners. Use gaudy colors. Add a ton of inconsistencies and bugs in the UI. And you have iOS7.

Now all of a sudden you're trying to shift it to other aspects of the OS? Is it because your first argument failed?

iOS uses icons, always had. Metro uses tiles, it's what Microsoft and everyone else calls them. Two completely different things.

Your argument that iOS copied metro falls into the same category as "Microsoft bailed out Apple" and "64 bit is useless on systems with low ram". Basically they are fanboyish myths that spread like a virus without any educated backing.

WhatTheSchmidt said,

OK, it is not an iPhone but I have an iPod touch so it is basically the same thing. But I get a few, limited number of icons such as calendar and clock showing updated information.

But you are taking one specific item and using it to claim that iOS is not copying a number of other elements of a design language.


The calendar date on iOS has shown the correct date long before metro existed, and a live clock jailbreak tweak has existed for nearly the same timeframe.....

iOS 7 is nothing like metro. Though sometimes I wish it had similar live features.

I liked this comment:

I heard a lot of people said they don't like live tile and blamed the slow growth of win8 to the new UI. Now Samsung said that they copied MS because of consumers wanting it. What a joke?
The past 3 year and today's event in a nutshell.

Didnt MS start Windows by copying someone else? Funny how people seem to forget that.

And you can copy things as long as you dont break any laws and change things enough. Just like a ton of companies do so it depends on what MS finds in Samsung that is infringing since I am sure they are looking closely at this. Samsung gets carried away to much and really pushes their luck. But until there is anything unlawful found...no big deal IMO.

This is going to stick with Sasmung just like Apples "you are holding it wrong", Google's "dont be evil", and several others.

Didnt MS start Windows by copying someone else? Funny how people seem to forget that.

Yes they did. They copied the concept of an operating system. How dare they.

But notice how you complain about Microsoft supposedly copying, and end with Samsung copying is "no big deal IMO."

I guess it is OK to give out two different opinions, again, as long as we don't comment on your non-opinion opinion.

Did you read anything I said. I said that if Samsung is not infringing on anything, then it is no big deal and that companies take ideas and use them for their own . This is allowed by law to do as long as you are not infringing on copyrights.

If Samsung is violating any laws, then it is a big deal obviously like the Apple copying.

Geesh

techbeck said,
Did you read anything I said. I said that if Samsung is not infringing on anything, then it is no big deal and that companies take ideas and use them for their own . This is allowed by law to do as long as you are not infringing on copyrights.

If Samsung is violating any laws, then it is a big deal obviously like the Apple copying.

Geesh

You are saying Samsung is innocent until guilty, which is perfectly fine. But you open your comment with

Didnt MS start Windows by copying someone else? Funny how people seem to forget that.

Which is Microsoft is guilty until proven innocent.

Geesh.

WhatTheSchmidt said,

Which is Microsoft is guilty until proven innocent.
Geesh.

WTF are you talking about? Was MS found guilty and charged? Did I comment about MS being charged or anything like that? Did I say MS was wrong with what they did? I made that comment just to state that all companies copy, even MS, and this is nothing new.

I never said MS was guilty...period. Read, understand, and then post.

techbeck said,

WTF are you talking about? Was MS found guilty and charged? Did I comment about MS being charged or anything like that? Did I say MS was wrong with what they did? I made that comment just to state that all companies copy, even MS, and this is nothing new.

I never said MS was guilty...period. Read, understand, and then post.

In the very first line of your comment, you made the accusation that Microsoft copied Windows from somebody else, and then say that we all forgot about it. If Microsoft did it, then they are "guilty" of doing it. Then you turn it around to make it look like I am the one who cannot comprehend what you write. But do you comprehend what you write?

WhatTheSchmidt said,
In the very first line of your comment, you made the accusation that Microsoft copied Windows from somebody else, and then say that we all forgot about it. If Microsoft did it, then they are "guilty" of doing it.

It is well known they copied something which again is allowed by law to do as long as you change things enough and not violate anyone's copyrights. So MS copied, they didnt violate any laws, and thus is not guilty of infringing on anything. If Samsung is found guilty by a COURT OF LAW, then they will be held liable and penalized. If the courts find nothing wrong, no big deal and who cares.


Then you turn it around to make it look like I am the one who cannot comprehend what you write.

And I stand by my statement.

techbeck said,

WTF are you talking about? Was MS found guilty and charged? Did I comment about MS being charged or anything like that? Did I say MS was wrong with what they did? I made that comment just to state that all companies copy, even MS, and this is nothing new.

I never said MS was guilty...period. Read, understand, and then post.


Actually Microsoft was sued. By Apple for using a gui similar to apples. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki...ter,_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corp.

This is the very point I am getting at.

1) You claim over and over again that Windows is a copy without giving any specific instances of which it is a copy.
2) When an example of something Samsung copied is given, specifically the Metro UI language, you say it is not a copy because they have not lost in court over it.
3) You fail to list any examples of when Microsoft has been taken to court over the unspecified areas in which Windows copied, and lost.

You are saying that Microsoft copies, but Samsung has not been proven to do so (even though they have) so they are just fine. And I am using the word "guilty" in the sense that you have declared that Microsoft copies, but exonerate Samsung because they have not been found guilty in court. Anybody can see that this is a copy of Metro. Well, anybody except for you.

WhatTheSchmidt said,
This is the very point I am getting at.

1) You claim over and over again that Windows is a copy without giving any specific instances of which it is a copy.

They do copy. My fault for not being specific and assuming people knew how Windows started.


2) When an example of something Samsung copied is given, specifically the Metro UI language, you say it is not a copy because they have not lost in court over it.

No, I didnt say it was not copying. I said companies are allowed to copy, and no big deal, as long as they are not violating any laws/copyrights. It has yet to be seen if they are.


You are saying that Microsoft copies, but Samsung has not been proven to do so (even though they have) so they are just fine. And I am using the word "guilty" in the sense that you have declared that Microsoft copies, but exonerate Samsung because they have not been found guilty in court. Anybody can see that this is a copy of Metro. Well, anybody except for you.

Again, wrong. I said its only a big deal if Samsung is violating any laws. In fact, I actually said they did copy by saying they are allowed to do so if they are not violating any laws.

So again, i never said Samsung didnt copy. I said it really is no big deal since you are allowed to to a certain extent, and that Samsung has not been charged with anything in this case.

techbeck said,

They do copy. My fault for not being specific and assuming people knew how Windows started.

No, I didnt say it was not copying. I said companies are allowed to copy, and no big deal, as long as they are not violating any laws/copyrights. It has yet to be seen if they are.

Again, wrong. I said its only a big deal if Samsung is violating any laws. In fact, I actually said they did copy by saying they are allowed to do so if they are not violating any laws.

So again, i never said Samsung didnt copy. I said it really is no big deal since you are allowed to to a certain extent, and that Samsung has not been charged with anything in this case.

The fact is that you claimed that Microsoft copied, but Samsung didn't because they were not taken to court for this one specific case, so it is "no big deal" and then, once again, you blame it on me. It is not my fault when you keep changing your store to spin yourself out of, once again, claiming Microsoft is wrong while every other company is pure as the driven snow.

WhatTheSchmidt said,
The fact is that you claimed that Microsoft copied, but Samsung didn't because they were not taken to court for this one specific case, so it is "no big deal" and then, once again, you blame it on me. It is not my fault when you keep changing your store to spin yourself out of, once again, claiming Microsoft is wrong while every other company is pure as the driven snow.

Ok, I will say this one more time...

I DID NOT say Samsung didnt copy, period. I said it is NO BIG DEAL as long a they are NOT INFRINGING on copyright laws. You are allowed to copy, by law, as long as laws are not broken.

Please tell me how this is saying Samsung didnt copy.

I have not changed my story on this. I said in my orignal post it was no big deal as long as they are not violating any laws. I NEVER said MS is wrong while every other company is "pure as snow" I said all companies are guilty of this and again, NO BIG DEAL unless laws are broken.

Not sure how much clearer I can make this, and nor will I try anymore.

WhatTheSchmidt said,
I think I will stop discussing this now. I am sitting next to a brick wall that will provide much more consistent and less flip-floppy debate.

I have not flip flopped once. I have kept stating what my original post was. You just cannot understand plain English are are accusing me of saying something I did not say. Not once have you proved that I said Samsung didnt copy. The only brick wall here is the one between you and understanding.

WhatTheSchmidt said,
Yes they did. They copied the concept of an operating system. How dare they.

When it is something that is common place in this day-and-age (like an OS) it is easy to look back, laugh about it, and say "how dare they" (in a joking tone). It was a much bigger deal when it was all cutting edge stuff.

In the near future, something like Kinect motion tracking or Google Glass could very well become such common place that someone might downplay the significance of the blatant copying. But if a Google Glass or Kinect clone came out tomorrow, you'd probably call foul/ripoff.

techbeck said,
Didnt MS start Windows by copying someone else? Funny how people seem to forget that.

And you can copy things as long as you dont break any laws and change things enough. Just like a ton of companies do so it depends on what MS finds in Samsung that is infringing since I am sure they are looking closely at this. Samsung gets carried away to much and really pushes their luck. But until there is anything unlawful found...no big deal IMO.

This is going to stick with Sasmung just like Apples "you are holding it wrong", Google's "dont be evil", and several others.

Samsung pushes their luck because they keep getting away with it and profiting insanely because of it. The Apple settlement (which continues to be whittled away by Samsung's lawyers), was a mere slap on the wrist. Samsung's Galaxy line of hardware has really taken off in popularity, and the fact that the first one violated a few patents (according to a jury) doesn't change the fact that Samsung continues to profit insanely by establishing itself in the high end smartphone the market with that patent infringing phone.

You are right though. They all have their cons, and Samsung's shameless blatent copying is their con that everyone except over zealous fans can recognize. Everyone DID recognize that Samsung was a blatant copy-cat just before the whole Apple v. Samsung thing. So many folks did a 180 on their opinion of Samsung just because they were considered the underdog against Apple. Hey, people love an underdog.

Shadrack said,

When it is something that is common place in this day-and-age (like an OS) it is easy to look back, laugh about it, and say "how dare they" (in a joking tone). It was a much bigger deal when it was all cutting edge stuff.

In the near future, something like Kinect motion tracking or Google Glass could very well become such common place that someone might downplay the significance of the blatant copying. But if a Google Glass or Kinect clone came out tomorrow, you'd probably call foul/ripoff.

When I wrote that, I was joking in that I was saying that Microsoft copied software named an operating system, and not a specific feature or way of doing something. Much like saying LibreOffice copied Office by creating a word processor.

Apple has already done this with "copying" Kinect. Didn't they file patents just recently for TV interaction through gestures, and then bought the company that people like to claim Microsoft stole tech from?

Shadrack said,
Samsung pushes their luck because they keep getting away with it and profiting insanely because of it. The Apple settlement (which continues to be whittled away by Samsung's lawyers), was a mere slap on the wrist. Samsung's Galaxy line of hardware has really taken off in popularity, and the fact that the first one violated a few patents (according to a jury) doesn't change the fact that Samsung continues to profit insanely by establishing itself in the high end smartphone the market with that patent infringing phone.

I thought Apple was able to get more money out of Samsung though and the judges initial settlement was changed?

And yes, Samsung is pushing their luck and are pretty ballsy about it. But that what companies like Samsung can do. They have the cash to keep these claims tied up in litigation for years while they continue to profit off of what they are doing. While things are tied up, they make a huge profit and the fine never comes close to that. So even if they are found guilty on these kind of things, they still come out the winner.

Anyway, I am waiting for Samsung's bubble to burst and would like to see other companies come out and do well. I think lots of people are getting sick of Samsung as well.

Will be interesting to see what MS says and does.

WhatTheSchmidt said,

When I wrote that, I was joking in that I was saying that Microsoft copied software named an operating system, and not a specific feature or way of doing something. Much like saying LibreOffice copied Office by creating a word processor.

Wow, you really missed my point. Can you not empathize with the position that when word processing was grand-spanking-new-technology, people saw copying in this space as a big deal? You need to go back in time and see what people were saying about Microsoft when they came out with Word. Most people considered it a blatant rip off of the then popular WordPerfect.

Apple has already done this with "copying" Kinect. Didn't they file patents just recently for TV interaction through gestures, and then bought the company that people like to claim Microsoft stole tech from?

MS licensed the tech from them.

Shadrack said,

Wow, you really missed my point. Can you not empathize with the position that when word processing was grand-spanking-new-technology, people saw copying in this space as a big deal? You need to go back in time and see what people were saying about Microsoft when they came out with Word. Most people considered it a blatant rip off of the then popular WordPerfect.


No, I got your point, and that is what I tried to explain (poorly). Copying an idea as broad as an OS, something that has been around since there were computers, is not really copying anybody.

MS licensed the tech from them.

And that is why I wrote "people like to claim Microsoft stole tech from" as there are still people out there who are claiming that Microsoft stole it from that company.

SOME did - not all (including WordPerfect themselves, which did NOT sue Microsoft - WordPerfect was then an independent company). Instead, WordPerfect declared business on Word, and competed. However, WordPerfect made two major mis-steps (to Word's one).

1. Word Mis-step - they took a giant step backward with Microsoft Word 5.0 (for DOS). forcing them to release the bugfix 5.5.
2. WordPerfect Mis-Step #1 - WordPerfect had a similar bungled launch with WordPerfect 6.0 for Windows - which led to the bugfix 6.0a and 6.0b.
3. WordPerfect Mis-Step #2 - they were horribly late in moving from Win16 to Win32 (after having format-compatability issues with WordPerfect for DOS in previous versions of WordPerfect for Windows). This two-step mis-step was, for many users (including me - I had been using and teaching WordPerfect since before the PC exen existed) the last straw - we switched to Word (and mostly Word 95, and later 97, in droves. (Believe it or not, I switched entirely due to the backward-compatibility issues. WordPerfect for Windows had them - surprisingly, Word 95 did not - in in either direction.)

techbeck - do you know how I can flag your comments or your handle to hide your posts? They just make me upset and prevent me from visiting this forum more often.

norseman said,
techbeck - do you know how I can flag your comments or your handle to hide your posts? They just make me upset and prevent me from visiting this forum more often.

Funny. Sounds like you have a personal problem if comments/opinions make you that upset. There are professionals you can see for that.

norseman said,
You just repeat the same hum drum bs all of the time and it is exhausting.

He is one of the most negative people I have encountered. Just a couple days ago, somebody was excited because they got 20,000 Likes on this forum. And he had to make sure that everybody knew of his disapproval. He couldn't just skip past it. And when somebody exposes it he then goes on the personal attack route, as he has here by claiming that you need to see a professional for what he implies is a mental disorder you have.

When he complains about the comments of others, he will state it is him expressing his opinion, and don't you dare try to dispute his opinion. But make a comment on his comment, and you have a mental disorder.

WhatTheSchmidt said,

SoylentG is it?

Anyway, I was personally attacked first, I didnt instigate it. And if a post bothers someone that much they steer clear of a site because of one person's comments, then I am sorry...that person has a problem.

Not surprised you commented on this. Since you seem oddly familiar.

Happy Monday

norseman said,
You just repeat the same hum drum bs all of the time and it is exhausting.

You have a problem with what I say, take it up with a moderator or admin.

techbeck said,

SoylentG is it?

Anyway, I was personally attacked first, I didnt instigate it. And if a post bothers someone that much they steer clear of a site because of one person's comments, then I am sorry...that person has a problem.

Not surprised you commented on this. Since you seem oddly familiar.

Happy Monday

And there he is with Ben's conspiracy theory. I see a lot of similarity between the posts of the two of you. Perhaps you are the same person, BenBeck.

Glad I went with LG for my latest phone, and it looks like I will be going with LG for my next tablet. Can't believe they are going to screw up a perfectly good UI with this crap.

Shameful.

As I said before: Doesn't matter? Samsung took huge flak for copying Apple - even hiring the same actor for their commercials as Apple, and now they wanna say "Who cares?"

Wow. The fact that this company can't do anything original will be their undoing. Microsoft took the time to develop a truly unique UI, only to have it blatantly copied without a care in the world by a separate entity, is quite saddening.

OTOH: Sincerest form of flattery? I guess MSFT can pat themselves on the back now. Only after taking whatever action they want to take here, if any.

Dot Matrix said,
OTH: Sincerest form of flattery?

Impossible, *everybody* hates the Modern UI. Now excuse us while we copy the crap out of it.

Dot Matrix said,
Wow. The fact that this company can't do anything original will be their undoing.

Hey! I take issue with that! Samsung's Galaxy Gear was original in how terrible it was.

Dot Matrix said,
OTOH: Sincerest form of flattery? I guess MSFT can pat themselves on the back now. Only after taking whatever action they want to take here, if any.

Perhaps they can persuade Samsung to join the WP bandwagon. Can always do with more OEMs to improve their market share.

wernercd said,

Because Apple and MS don't copy... Nope. Not them. Only Samsung.

Apples already well into their Modern UI clone it's called iOS7

wernercd said,

Because Apple and MS don't copy... Nope. Not them. Only Samsung.

Saying someone copied isn't the same as saying others don't copy.

But in this case it's just too Obvious. Apple made iOS flatter and added a few animations and gestures similar to Windows (Phone). But overall it was still iOS. For this new Samsung UI it appears Samsung threw away the old and copied Microsoft.

Having said that, there are some things Microsoft could learn from this UI. Starting with having 'huge' tiles. I wouldn't mind setting the Bing News tile as large as the news tile on Samsung's start screen. Samsung also doesn't waste screen realestate. On Windows 8 at least Microsoft wastes too much space On the top and bottom. It looks nice on larger screens but on smaller screens they should do away with it. It should probably depent on the screensize, like the amount of tiles in a column. On Windows Phone they dont waste this space either. Hopefully the merge of the two Windows teams will help sort out this mess.

trip21 said,
Apples already well into their Modern UI clone it's called iOS7

Which looks nothing like Windows or Windows Phone in the slightest. Not sure what you're getting at here.

Designs can have influence though, and that much we can see. However, it's not copying so much as it is how times change. Hell, just look at fashion...

Samsung is the king of copying. I'm not discrediting the quality of Samsung products as I have only owned TVs made by Sammy. But holy crap do they blatantly copy.

Then why has Microsoft not sued the Weather Channel (which is using the same fonts and a similar design)? No, I'm not kidding - nor am I the only Neowinian to notice.

PGHammer said,
Then why has Microsoft not sued the Weather Channel (which is using the same fonts and a similar design)? No, I'm not kidding - nor am I the only Neowinian to notice.

You are not the only one to notice. The difference is that TWC and MS is not in competition, so it is not that big a deal. That would be like Microsoft suing everyone who writes an app for Win8 because they copy the guidelines that Microsoft puts out for writing apps for Win8.

techbeck said,
Samsung is pushing their luck. I am waiting for their bubble to burst.

Complete with Michael Bay special f/x and by special I mean explosions. XD

boumboqc said,
Oups, sorry I thought it was apple. Microsoft wouldn't do that.

You forgot your /s at the end of that sentence. Heaven forbid anyone take that statement literally.