Shared publicly  - 
 
Samsung Copied Apple and That's Why It Succeeded - Pundits

Apple fans say Samsung copied Apple and that's why Samsung is a loser.

Android fans say Samsung didn't copy Apple any more than Apple copied Samsung, and that Samsung is a winner.

But at least two pundits, +Farhad Manjoo  and +Robert Scoble, have an alternative opinion. Namely, that Samsung did in fact copy Apple and that's why Samsung is a winner.

These guys point out that the companies that didn't copy Apple (Nokia, RIM, Palm, Microsoft and so on) have become smartphone market also-rans.

Samsung, they argued, copied Apple. And while it cost them a billion dollars in "damages," that's lunch money compared to how much they're making quarter over quarter with their smart phones. 

(Manjoo points out that Samsung started out copying, but has evolved away from that and now innovates.)

What do you think? Is this the right view? Was copying Apple the winning strategy?

https://plus.google.com/111091089527727420853/posts/g9GqgoWSXxR

http://pandodaily.com/2012/08/25/copying-works-how-samsungs-decision-to-mimic-apple-paid-off-in-spades/

(Scoble pic props to +Guy Kawasaki: http://www.guykawasaki.com/enchantment/pictures/ )

(Manjoo pic props to +New America Foundation:  http://www.flickr.com/photos/newamerica/6198178475/ )
491
92
Joe Adams's profile photoJames Marshall's profile photoLou Arguello's profile photoJohn Bergstrom's profile photo
385 comments
 
Manjoo points out that Samsung started out copying, but has evolved away from that and now innovates
Fair Enough.
 
Well, it worked for Apple, after all.
 
1. Copy 2. Do it better than the original is often the winning strategy. Thats how Finland grew from agricultural society to one of the forerunners in technology in many areas in just a few decades after the WW2.
 
Samsung sell great phones at more affordable prices. The iPhone 5 will have to be something else to beat the s3
 
What about the guys that also did and became losers: Sony, Motorola, HTC?

Samsung's success comes as much from trying so many formulas, and being able to with economies of scale and partnerships with carriers, and finding a few successful packages as emulating Apple.
 
I think we should stop making posts about this until after the decision on injunctions is made.  We all know the media influences courts, whether they want it to or not; and the last thing we want is to have to buy over priced Apple shit if all the good Samsung phones get yanked from the market.
 
Never been a fan of Apple or Samsung and never will be...
 
Billion dollar settlement? No, billion dollar punishment and likely import ban on several products. On top of that we might see a settlement to be able to sell these products, but I guess that will cost Samsung dearly as well.
 
flexible screens, new shaped devices, beyond typical phone designs all in the future. Rectangular boxes with rounded corners will be the new brick phone of tomorrow.
 
+Shaun Nicholson +Scott Watson The 4S beat the S3 already in first quarter sales. 4S had 15million, S3 had 10million. Assuming history repeats itself (which it has with every iPhone release), the 5 will have sales greater than all the previous combined.

S2 has sold 10 million since it's existence. Not even close.
 
When I've heard the verdict, I had exactly the same thought, like Robert Scobble - $1bln is peanuts comparing to the market share they (Samsung) won thanks to copying Apple.Simple and clear business case in a retro style of XX century. Both companies will have to live with it, and probably neither of them is happy, but it may have profound impact on the future of patent laws worldwide.
 
Microsoft also employed that strategy. I remember a news program that took a hidden camera to a meeting where Bill Gates was speaking and he told the developers to copy successful products.
 
This is not about Samsung. It's about Apple. When Apple came out with the Macintosh, Microsoft copied the software. Jobs was not about to let that happen again. Twenty three+ years later with the iPhone, Apple has prevailed.  As far as Samsung's strategy being a succeeding strategy, only time will tell.
 
+Greg Billetdeaux I wasn't talking about sales figures.

Are you talking about sales figures or US sales figures?   That is only 4% of the potential market.
 
Money was the winning strategy. Samsung had the marketing muscle and the power to have their phones released in all carriers (with minor modifications and now with no modifications. They were also the only ones, since the Galaxy S was released and before it was a success, to promote their phones almost on par with Apple. I remember seeing billboards everywhere when the Galaxy S was released. The phone also had a great screen and a very good processor which also helped but I think it was the money behind it that helped it succeed.
 
+Daniel Yang I hope those times, when it could be a succesful strategy are gone (or will be gone very soon). There is a paradigm shift now in business ethics (or at least I hope there will be one).
 
+Peter Shannon Samsung devices when they first got into Android looked had no similarities to the iPhone.  As soon as they came out with the Galaxy S there were so many similarities that even Google pointed out "Don't be so blatant about it." It is one thing to be subtle about it, and another blatantly.  I was surprised Apple took so long to sue them about it(could have happened earlier, but court delays made it take so long).  They moved forward and changed things which saved their future products and actually came out with some great stuff(Except the Note 10.1 which is a POS).

+Mikael Nilsson There is no import Ban in the US for the devices.  They are actually EOL anyway and no longer produced that Apple won on.
 
Thank goodness Samsung copied Apple. At least now I have an amazing device that doesn't cost me an arm and a leg. Thank you Samsung for catering for developing markets :-)
 
Copied or not, Samsung did a great job with the Galaxy Series. S3 it's a monster and iPhone 5 won't be better, nevermind!
 
The way I see it working out which is fair to companies, developers, and consumers.  If you are going to patent software...  It HAS to be licensed from that point forward for X numbers of years.  Presume 10 years.  Something like no less than 25 cents per device, and no more than $1 per device(depending on how large the coding is).  This will allow the small developers to make some money and deters larger companies from stealing code.
 
Is there people who really give a flying F*%#?
  All the crap, going on in the world, and you have nothing to think about, other than the millions of dollars, of two companies, that you will not get one red penny from.
 
+James Lanning So your suggestion is that I ignore what I do for a living (writing about technology) and instead devote my Google+ blog here to writing about "all the crap going on in the world"? Is that your suggestion? 
 
do you want to kill me put that gun down
 
Not one to want to ruin a party with reality but:

"It didn't dawn on us [that we agreed that Samsung had infringed] on the first day," Ilagan said. "We were debating heavily, especially about the patents on bounce back and pinch-to-zoom. Apple said they owned patents, but we were debating about the prior art [about the same technology that Samsung said existed before the iPhone debuted]. [Velvin Hogan] was jury foreman. He had experience. He owned patents himself. In the beginning the debate was heated, but it was still civil. Hogan holds patents, so he took us through his experience. After that it was easier. After we debated that first patent -- what was prior art --because we had a hard time believing there was no prior art, that there wasn't something out there before Apple.

"In fact we skipped that one," Ilagan continued, "so we could go on faster. It was bogging us down." ...

"Once you determine that Samsung violated the patents," Ilagan said, "it's easy to just go down those different [Samsung] products because it was all the same. Like the trade dress, once you determine Samsung violated the trade dress, the flatscreen with the Bezel...then you go down the products to see if it had a bezel. But we took our time. We didn't rush. We had a debate before we made a decision. Sometimes it was getting heated."

See that? That's called a Jury ignoring instruction. That's not only grounds for an appeal, that's grounds for a solid rule 50b. That's something a juror actually said. Quinn is going to have a field day. In the very least, you can expect the judgement overturned. Ok, back to your regularly scheduled click-bait extravaganza.
 
Yes, copying basic design is standard in every consumer product, from the laptop (the earliest design of which Apple mimicked as closely as Samsung mimicked them) to the refrigerator to the flat screen TV. Someone refines an optimal design and others start there.
 
+James Lanning +Mike Elgan This is some of the crap going on in the world.

A hugely rich company that cannot be bothered to compete by selling better products uses lawyers to try and beat down a foreign competitor.

Sounds like news to me
 
Well actually +James Lanning for me personally (and this is kinda off topic). The basis for this so called crap could mean the difference for a lot of your so called crap that is being patented that should not have been. Just a lame example, a lot of medicine for a various deceases are patented. So My hope is that in the end this will create a precedent and the end for ¨crap¨ patents. Just saying. Continue.
 
Samsung maybe created some devices that looks a bit like Apple. But is successful in price and good Android.
 
+Mike Elgan great post. Thank you. I agree with both of their views. I live Samsung phones, and I not going to get into a heated discussion if the SGSI was copied or not. Fact is all the companies copy a successful design. That is why tv's, laptop's,ultrabooks, and refrigerators look a lot alike. But since the first galaxy phone Samsung has evolved and invented and created awesome phones which have nothing to do with the IPhone. The SGSII and SGSIII are so much more advanced the the latest iPhone (4s). To each their flavor. But spec wise Samsung had surpassed Apple with their phones....
 
If samsung sucks, then apple sucks considering their devices are made from samsung parts. Food for thought.
 
+Mike Elgan  You do what you do because your good at what you do .Stick with  it and pay no attention to doubters 
 
It also worked for Microsoft. DOS and Windows were both stolen too.
 
Well, maybe it impacts, or rocks some folks.  But in my neck of the woods, I'll get no after shocks.
 
+David Horvath The sad thing is the metric ton of money wasted because of the need for the court to pander to Apple. Rather than helping, they really kinda screwed Apple. That idiotic jury foreman that basically bullied the rest of the jury because he "had a patent on something once" has practically handed everything to Samsung with his stupidity. You can't have a jury publicly admitting they ignored instruction, especially after rushing the judgement and it containing serious million dollar errors. Now we get to watch this play out for another three years, and watch Motorola try to get all Apple's products banned for import. The real losers here are Apple and the consumer. Apple fans are going to notice Samsung has cut off the parts supply to Apple, and why wouldn't they? Samsung fans are going to be mildly inconvenienced when they have to buy a slightly different Samsung phone, and Apple looks like the laughingstock of tech again.
 
Arrggghhhh!!!!!!!!

iPhone 4S is the 5th iPhone

Next will be 6
 
The problems started when the "Intellectual Property" mafia succeeded in replacing "inspired by" with "copying" and "stealing" in our minds.
 
Just because the iPhone 5 will probably sell really great does not make it a great phone. Apple has only copied Android for the last 4 phones with saying such as the drop down box notification and Siri. It might be a great seller but only because the simple minded fan base that likes easy and simplicity and no change. Which is all good if that's what they want. But eventually apple will go away until google glasses comes out and then Apple will copy that just like they're doing with the new 7 inch tablet
Uyen Vu
 
I think, If looking for smartphone like a Tsirt, It's will be simple. I think SS was smartphone along time before.
 
i would say samsung did copy apple to some degree which, however, is common in this industry. n this kinda copying shouldn't be considered at the patent level. 
 
This will get tied up in appeals and apple will never see that money.
On a side note, I just dont see how you can copy technology and innovation when your running a different operating system. Apple is so slow to change and Samsung is improving there phones every 6 months and Google updates there OS about as often. Apple should have been smarter like google and sold there operating system off like google they would be looking at this phone war all differently. I could care less if Samsung copied Apple, we can not moved forward if your living in the past
 
+Glenn Geonzon concepts like "Bump Scrolling" cannot be stolen. That*'s the whole point. And a lot of stuff that is called "copying" in #applevssamsung  just isn't. It has been programmed, implemented in a different way. 
 
Most people don't care about the stuff and Android does or is important to people who love Android.  I respect both platforms and own both.
So I must be half stupid to use an iPhone?  The subjective opinions and comments here are really laughable.
 
Apple's argument seems to be that only they are allowed to steal from others. And I think most rational people recognise that.
 
Nope you wrong.. Samsung succeed because they adopt Android better than others OEM. Fact: compare Sony, LG to Nokia and RIM
 
no I don't agree with this samsung is a great company
 
+Chanchal Bhatia And that's all well and good, and speaks to the trendy nature of your social circle, but the simple fact of the matter is that 9 out of 10 people you see every day do not own any Apple products. Apple doesn't make products for most of us. Most of us in this horrible economy can't afford 500 dollars for a toy.
 
+Chanchal Bhatia I agree with you.  I have VP and CEO on my resume of past accomplishments and I've made millions in my career being a successful businessman.  
I like the iPhone and I like Android but by no means am I stupid or a sheep.
 
why do you think Samsung was singled out, only because it was doing better than Apple. Do you have an old Nokia device. Isn't there a grid style layout on it. Edgeto edge glass on a full touch screen isn't something unique to Apple again. Speaker slot on the base is again a design element in many Sony Ericsson design of yesteryears. I repeat Apple is being a cry baby and because of what they have done I want to sell my 4s and buy a Samsung phone.
 
+Reginald Bowie they had a couple of devices on the way, evidence which was presented to late to court to go before the jury. Originally the F700 was part of the complaint but was removed because it was a pure touch interface and would have hurt the Apple case.

That's almost irrelevant though. Everyone copies everyone in the tech sector. Apple started they were great at stealing everybody else's ideas in the past. That it's how it had always worked and worked for the companies providing the best product. When laws are used to prevent it it hurts the consumer: we get stuck with worse and more expensive products.

The law as it stands stinks. Why can't I hate the player and the game? Well, actually hate it's much too strong. Unjust laws, or those that don't function properly, have always been despised: a tax on tea anyone? Just my British joke, sorry ;-)
 
I just want to know what kind of gun is that...
 
It should be pointed out that Apple lost this case four times before this win. They lost in Germany, the UK, The Netherlands, and Korea. They lost because their case has no merit. In most cases they got laughed out of court, and their pretend patents invalidated. This fact somehow seems to miss most articles on the topic. All tech companies are thieves. It's the nature of innovation. Apple has just been the first one to actually patent stolen ideas, then have the stones to actually try to sue someone with their stolen goods.
Jin Y
 
Fanboys exist because people can't afford everything.
 
This just in:  Whirlpool is suing Samsung for copying their refrigerator light that comes on when you open the door.  News at 11...
 
Stop the bullcrap. It's simple math: Most people (like me) can't afford to pay $700 for a phone when I can get a better one for half the price. That's all. The reason I switched to android has nothing to do with Samsung copying Apple, in fact, my first android was a Sony Xperia Ray and I liked it more than I ever liked an iPhone so please use your brain and stop thinking that people only buy Samsung or android because it's like an iPhone; we buy android phones because we don't like getting ripped off.
 
Does anyone really believe that Apple (or even Samsung) were the first to think up or even create the IP in any of these patents? 
 
The big losers here are consumers! The only way to stifle Apple's influence is the cell phone carriers! Carriers stop carrying Apple, mainly due to the fact it's only a fraction of its generated revenue where Android phones produce so much $$$ for them.
Translate
 
i like android because it has good price and good features 
 
David Perez:
I paid 199 for my iPhone, where do you come up with the 700 dollar figure?  My Android was 249.00 where's the proof of your argument.
If you buy the phone from a carrier and sign a contract on either platform, you will get discounted pricing so it never costs 700 dollars.
Try buying a Galaxy s3 with no contract.  What's the price?
 
You could look at another ubiquitous product that seems to be doing a similar change. Hybrid electric cars all have similar things under the hood and similar design (4 wheels, a hood, and a trunk, and electric motor with gasoline engine, batteries, radio, speakers, el cetera). Yes, Apple created an efficient design with a large touch screen (they stole the ipod from creative and the iPad from HP). Samsung (or anybody else) does not use the same screen technology (hydro-lipid phobic glass), just the shape.
Apple should realize that imitation (even the most minute) is either a nod to great design or boiled down to the fundamentals of user interface. Instead, they are upset because they are losing market share to superior products and rather than innovate, they have to sue to eliminate.
Paul V
 
it's about us, the consumers! spend money on research and development rather then litigation, i wish Apple would think about their consumers rather then themselves, flame all you want...
 
I think Samsung has won. And, yes, they did blatantly copy. The fate of Nokia, Rim, etc. has nothing to do with them not copying but rather their OS choice and other bad choices. Samsung is a huge player and very aggressive. They were willing to bend over backwards for operators way back when it was almost a private brand for operators like Verizon and Sprint. Now they have moved up in rank and are willing to do anything for market share. But most importantly, because the whole world now is saying Apple vs Samsung. That to me is a marketers dream. People are now associating the underdog (perhaps) with one brand. That's great for Samsung. All of this for just a billion dollars. Nice job. Just my two cents. 
 
I think it is because also with this aproach people now has options and no just a single device ruling the world! I agree, Samsung copied apple to start but now they are far superior because of inovation compared to the old ios interface which is almost the same since that time showing no evolution!
 
Evidently, copying Apple was Samsung's winning strategy. The damages are indeed negligible, but I'm quite sure Apple wasn't after the damages. I'm not entirely sure what they're after, or how it'll help prevent the competition from copying them.
 
The problem is that in the end all android phones will have to pay a license to apple making their phones cost more. Apple will win in the end IMHO...
 
I don't know about this, all I know is Samsung make affordable smartphones for the masses. No jury would disagree )
 
Doesn't this all assume that Apple actually invented anything? Are we to truly believe that they "invented" a round cornered rectangle?
 
I shy away from Apple mobile products (love a lot of their other products) because I feel I should have total control over anything I purchase. I do not want forced into an ecosystem. I do not want industry standard things like flash or being able to download things, or having access to my filesystem restricted. It blows my mind how closed and crippled iOS is compared to the wonder that OSX is. It's so anti-apple it's ludicrous. I watched half my department at work shed their iphones and blackberry devices in the past two years for Android phones for one simple reason: phone envy. They wanted my cool wallpaper and my cool icons. They wanted a taskbar where they wanted it, or they wanted to be able to surf the net unhindered. They wanted my wicked one-click vpn/ssh solution, or my swipe to remote desktop setup. And they have those things now. And if Apple could copy Android customization features as easily as they copy android usability functions, they'd probably all have kept their iphones. I played with iOS6 and my overwhelming opinion was "oh, this again". It has barely changed in what, four years now? It's getting old for the consumer. The iphone is the honda civic of phones trying to pretend it's a porsche 911. Porsche can get away with making the same car for 20 years. You can't do that in tech for very long.
 
I read a great write-up somewhere about how this case now is making people all over the world realize that Apple and Samsung are the same damn thing, but Samsung is half as expensive and you can run OSX on PCs now... they say it was the best Billion Dollar ad a tech company could get....
 
Haven't the court just said that Samsung products are the same as Apple's? So Samsung make similar products at less than half the price, right?
 
I don't agree that Samsung is the winner because they happen to be more innovative. Com'n now! Apple came out with the idea in the first place. They have the right to defend and protect their original concept.
So who gets the credit? The chicken or the egg? God does, he invented the chicken first. Evolution you lose!
 
Apple steals ideas and Samsung copies, that is simply corporate business.
 
The original galaxy s, I would say looks similar to the iphone. But all the other phones? Definitely not. How does the epic 4g infringe on apple's iphone trade dress patents by any chance? This is what makes me sad that the jurors found this phone guilty on all charges. Its like they just circled a bunch of stuff just to get out of there. I'd say if apple really owns the "rubber banding" effect then yes all phones have infringed that. But the look and feel of the epic 4g infringes on iphone 3g? Come on, something is fishy there.
 
+Anoki Casey +Tom Kelsall I did a post about this earlier. I'm the "tech guy" in my family and circle of friends, and I had that question posed to me in just that way a dozen times in the past few days, and it blind-sided me the first few times. I guess it's because I'm very technical, but I wasn't expecting to be asked "Is samsung as good as apple?". People have been so successfully marketed that "apple is the best" that it's how their brains work. What I've been saying is that it's the Samsung parts that make Apple products so great, so if they bought something that was 100 percent Samsung parts instead of just 50 percent, it would probably be even better. Because answering that way is very amusing to me, and I like helping people.
 
+Bob Jewels not sure about the iphone. But i paid full on my samsung galaxy s 3 for tmobile and it's $600 with no contract.
 
+Chris Holt  All the technologies are derived from much older technologies. So you could argue that actual inventions in the past decade are minimal. Or you could argue that every new product is an invention in its own way, and consider that even the iPhone name is an invention of Apple's. Invention is a relative term, and this is an argument repeated to death and far beyond death.
 
To simply attribute Samsung's success to copying Apple and others failures to not copying Apple sounds
overly simplified to me and somewhat not very thoughtful. One wonders why Nokia was successful earlier before the smartphone revolution? Who did they copy then? I wonder if any of these guess ever used any of these devices ,especially the galaxy s3, that device deserves every success it got.
Jared P
 
Its like saying GM should sue KIA.. like wtf.. this is going to put a halt on innovation.
 
+Scott Wilson I agree with the phone envy comment but mostly for  for geeks like you and me.
Most of the public that I come in contact with really does not care about the one click vpn/ssh solution, they don't care about the cool wallpaper and icons.  I'm just stating facts from my own personal observations.  Others may observe differently.
I have one employee who had an Atrix as his phone then got an iPad as a gift and his next phone is going to be an iPhone.
He's one of the smartest geeks I know who does some really cool things with his devices.  I don't know why he's changing but it is his decision.

I work in Healthcare and the overwhelming preponderance of iPhones to Androids is staggering.  
So I think it is really a matter of choice for people to make.  Is Shell any less evil than Exxon or Getty etc?  People still buy what brand they are loyal to on a general level.
When my iPhone starts to fall behind my Android in its ability to do what I need to do - that is when I will make an informed decision.
 
Apple is a waste, Samsung will lead the smartphone world.
Kyle W
+
4
5
4
 
I'm so tired of this topic
 
+Christen Perey OK you win.....lol I believe the iPhone at full retail is $650.  But that's not enough of a difference to support the arguments of others that you overpay for an iPhone - that is not a valid argument.
 
+Bob Jewels Oh, most definitely. Google failed to make Android "feel" better for a long time and concentrated completely on features and power. In my opinion, they were a year late with Project Butter. That perception of smoothness or lack thereof is what really hurt Android, despite it being a much better and much more stable mobile operating system. That's mostly corrected in Jelly Bean, and they still obliterated the mobile market worldwide, but they'd have a much larger, much more diverse userbase if they'd concentrated on pretty and smooth earlier.
 
well apple is guru in stealing and copying and samsung is just learning and they taking thier classes from apple only
 
Yes, they started out with a similar product and then went different directions with it. That's literally the story of all human creative progress. Do people know that Beethoven's Ninth contains several melodies and ideas from previous concertos? That his "Ode to joy" contains Pachabel's Canon? What about Da Vinci's use of Hellenistic Greek art and sculpture? Previous creativity is the basis for new innovations. Sometimes those innovations are huge and sometimes they're small but they didn't grow out of a vacuum.
 
I submit, that there are few if any, truly original ideas.  Everything we do is a modification, or a re-engineering of an already existing concept or process.  That is not to say, that we don't invent, or innovate.  These inventions and innovations exist because they are inspired by earlier thoughts.  Where I see the problem is with companies that are scrambling to "own" things that are "Industry Standards".  I understand and respect brand copy rights but corporations will soon try to brand water and air.  We already have companies trying to sue farmers who's crops have been "contaminated" with GMO pollen etc...  At some point the system will crash in on itself and we will be the on itself and we will be the ones to suffer the consequences.

My 2 centavos 
 
My wife's Galaxy S 2 is fantastic. So great that I bought another Galaxy S 2 for myself, and then a Galaxy Tab 2 for her. They're great products, and they are android to the core, not some iOS clone.

Apple saying that Samsung copied them just amounts to an ad campaign for Samsung. "Just as cool as Apple, half the price." Also, now they have that "bad boy" mystique.
 
Cue even more butt-hurt from 14 year olds on the Internet. Samsung lost. Get over it. They're not your friend, they're not on your side. They're just "not Apple". Grow the hell up.

If you must defend Samsung (which is only excusable if you actually work there or are a shareholder) then take comfort in the fact that the S3 is an amazing "non-infringing" phone. They copied, they got the top of the market and now they don't need to copy any more.

If not for Apple, what devices would we still be using?

This? http://www.66mobile.com/images/zoom/samsung/samsung-x660.jpg
 
Bingo +Eng. Jorge Santana they will all have to pay license fees. The thing that makes Android appealing is that it is "free" as opposed to WinMo. Apple knows that if they can drive up the license fees many OEMs will consider leaving android and either coming up with something proprietary or going with WinMo. If Apple can divide the rest of the market, they can conquer all of it. Samsung did blatantly copy Apple though, and their decision to do so will probably not hurt them... Google on the other hand was just handed a major defeat. Now the precedent has been set and Apple's legal team can take aim at HTC, SONY, LG, and Motorola.
 
I think the war of smart begins in this era
 
+Gurpreet Singh I can see how you'd think that way, but it's not the case. Samsung has been in business since 1938. Phones are a tiny part of their overall product portfolio. And despite the fact that they make TVs and radios and all manner of electronic devices, they also make military grade hardware, and the largest ships in the world. Samsung is a monster. They also have their electronic components in just about every electronic thing you own. When you buy a Samsung phone, it was made in a Samsung factory with Samsung parts. A samsung made packaging machine puts the phone in the box made from Samsung made cardboard, and it gets put on a Samsung pallet made by a Samsung pallet making machine. That gets picked up by a forklift also made by Samsung, then put into a shipping container also made by them, lifted by a crane also made by Samsung,and put on a ship made by them also, bound for some port in California. Samsung is no stranger to business, or dirty business tactics for that matter.
 
Its smart business to be inspired by market leading products and concepts. To say Samsung simply copied apple is not really accurate. Samsung haven't done anything apple isn't proud of doing in the past. I'm sick of product bans for minor patents most of which should be invalidated. I.e universal search.
 
As far as I know apple made only computers and mp3 players not long ago. So? What you are saying is that they just woke up one day with a fabulous invention of a rectangular device (smartphone) and build it overnight from scratch without copying anything.
Despite the fact that almost everybody in the world already had a rectangular device to make calls, txt, install programs, and also with icons that had rounded corners. Nokia 7710 (2004)
 
Copy Smopy...If you think that copying is making a thin screen, that you can touch, that is the size of a phone than you are silly. All things that resemble a computer is clicking on icons that open applications. Who started this ??? hmmm...lets think about it. Should Apple be shut down completely for copying this idea? The idea of opening an application by clicking on an icon, or touching an icon. The only thing I see as a copy is unlocking the screen by sliding. Ok..I will go back to pushing a button to unlock my phone then.  Samsung rules
 
+Mike Elgan Samsung copied Apple. Their defense: Apple stole so we steal from them. Except 2 wrongs don't make a right.
Global social mood indicates isolationism is on the rise. The Euro is in danger of breaking up. My point: this verdict is an indication of this trend in social mood and Samsung is not the winner here. People want to buy American products more than anytime in the last generation or so. I could be wrong, but Samsung is in for a very rough ride.
 
+Andrei C Zamfir Except you are wrong. The rest of the world, after watching Apple get laughed out of court in Germany, the UK, The Netherlands, and Korea simply views this as an elitist American company using cheap asian slave labour winning on it's home turf with a bought court. Go read some articles printed by the foreign press. The world hates Apple right now.
 
Good to be in the uk, none of this bs we just get what the hell we want and Sammy is selling real good as is that apple fone thing
 
Fuck! They didn't copy anything, its a common sense to make a rectangular shaped phone. Perhaps they were inspired but not copied, God!
 
The real winners here are the Samsung phone and laptop users that paid a lot less for what the court says is a copy.
 
Whats the gun toting idiot trying to prove ?
 
According to these pundits Samsung gained more than they lost. If we believe what they say then according to them they have to pay more than $1billion for becoming the #2 phone company in the world leaving HTC and RIM behind. Noting that Microsoft paid way way more to buy Skype.
 
Apple is an inspirational company in smartphone market..it's inspired us include the Samsung
 
iPhone 5 better knock my socks off, or I'm getting an HTC One X.
 
+Stephen Ritger I've been so enamoured with MIUI lately that I'm seriously considering importing a Xiaomi MI2. Check them out.
 
apple copied star trek which,if memory serves, copied 2001.
 
what would be the design of smart phone? triangular or octagonal shape with shape edge. this should also decide by apple .
 
All I know is that I hugged and kissed my wife and I may be in trouble because Apple might have a patent on that too.
 
btw, for you kids out there, 2001 was a movie by stanley kubrick from the 60s.
 
Apple copied Xerox. Microsoft copied Apple. Google copied Microsoft.  Apple copied Palm. Google (and Samsung) copied Apple. Everyone copies everyone in technology. They take what exists and make it better. That's called competition and it's been the staple of a thriving technology market since day one. But Apple is tired of competing, so instead they send out the army of lawyers to sue, limit competition and thereby attempt to create a monopoly. Then they won't have to worry about competition anymore. Shame on you, Apple.
 
an apple you can't eat won't keep the doctor away
 
It is not what you did or did not do. It is not even what you can prove. If it what you can convince 12 people in the jury box. It is your dream (law) team.
 
Give me a break. Apple Fan boy. only the first devices. There latest 8 handsets and all but the first tablets were out of the law suit. Just to make you feel even better. Even if the judge rules against them and puts the 3 times levy. When they appeal the upper court has already said it would give credit to even the designs. They want the Sony stuff included which this judge just ignored. My fear is this wont end until it goes to the supreme court. This was just the first step if both parties don't just agree. Considering Samsung now has 62% of handset market. I think they just need to solve this thereself. Patent wars are never over. So get a life go back to IOS or Mac and chill. Nothing is over and nothing is complete. This is just another way of getting everybody worked up. I use everything. Android, IOS. Windows and MAC. There all good. Apple does copy stuff and get late patents. They have had 670 patents denied in the three years. They were planning a show down. We don't need to be involved. Steve use to brang about it saying innovation would stop without this. Its just apple trying to hold on to the market. It will always swing one way and yet it always swings back to another. So please concern yourself in the software let the companies work it out there biter rival war among themselves. We only need be concerned with the what we use. And if one doesn't have what we want we will move. 
 
Samsung would of sold more phones if it stuck with stock android UI... Its why I returned my SG3, TouchWiz is so terrible! I didn't want to deal with ROMs either. I'll just wait for the next Nexus.
 
New models of Samsung phones already have had some of the affected features removed. 30£ to use YOUR OWN IMPLEMENTATION of "slide to unlock", "bounce scrolling", "pinch to zoom" and other very minor features can be probably fought in court as extortionate. The "round rectangle" has been recognised nonpatentable so as long as nobody claims they're building an "iPad" they should be safe.

Anyone going their own way will have to solve exactly the same problems they have with Android, with the main difference that doing so they will have nobody's backing while with Android at least they may hope for Google's support.

Going their own will not solve the problem as the challenge is work around gestures. Given some of them are are now hardcoded in every smartphone user's muscle memory, UIs are by any means nonfunctional without them. Apple will be taking them to court the very minute they start to represent a threat.

This is corporate bullying at its best, and it's perfectly legal and legitimate for Apple to exert that, as they would leave money on the table otherwise.

The only way out is changing the law.
 
But wasn't there a cease-and-desist order with the verdict?  Meaning that Samsung can no longer put all of those infringing models on the shelf? Because otherwise, Samsung would just continue to put out a product that infringes on the patent and it makes the whole case kind of pointless. 
 
People seem to forget that tablets running windows tablet edition existed for many years before Apple's crippled take on the tablet appeared. I personally owned a Gridpad I purchased used from a warehouse in Harrisburg PA. I heard about them because Conrail used them in their trains, and they were used extensively by NASA. Later I had a fujistsu stylistic. Loved that thing. I also had a TX2, which was my first "convertible" tablet, but found it too unwieldy. So for me, a tablet is supposed to be a full desktop replacement. It blew my mind I couldn't use a mouse with the iPad when I got it. Even better, I got banned from an apple forum for asking how you use a mouse with an ipad. "Why would you want to do that?". I thought they were kidding. It's a tablet. Of course you'd include something as easy to implement as mouse support for finer detailed work when you need it. That's when I realized that the ipad was a toy. Thankfully Asus has the Transformer line of tablets, they do function excellently as full desktop replacements (using an Infinity right now), and I don't have to suffer with Apple's narrowly defined idea of what a tablet should be able to do.
 
What ever the result of the case but Samsung had taken some what market of Apple.
JT Vega
 
Apple and Samsung both have touch screens which one do you think copy the other?
 
Apple just couldn't let the same thing happen again.. Remember Microsoft vs Apple ? 
 
The world were we live today, if someone sneezes before you, you could be sued for copying them if you sneeze later.
Both Apple and Samsung are coorprate giants, and when titans clash guess who suffers? 

With the rapid development in these technologies, it all about who can  provide the most improved and bug free gadget to the public. 
 
+Sergio Iván Cadavid Cadavid nope.... it indeed very closer, unless u are talking about ctrl+c, ctrl+v.
taken the idea, but that doesnt mean they worked less than what apple did, or does.
 
Apple's guys have shit in their head but it is also true that Samsung was heavily copying iPhone. Infact many most of Samsung phones(if brand names are removed) will look like "Unpolished" iPhone
 
Fact: Samsung showed very little originality and creativity in their copying. The lack of such is exactly why Samsung deserved to lose. You can say what you want about Apple, but their creativity and originality is undeniable, even if you insist that they themselves stole their ideas from someone else. The fact remains that they put a lot of effort into designing their products.
 
+Scott Wilson have to disagree that Butter is a year late. I'm an iPhone 4 user at the two year mark where I normally upgrade. Jellybean with Butter and Google Now will freeze me in place until I can get a look at the next Nexus, particularly what Sony, HTC and perhaps Asus bring to the table. I love my iPhone but more and more of my workflow depends on Google products and services. And it doesn't help Apple that Siri was left off the iPhone 4 (even though it works if you jailbreak it) while Google's voice search works great on legacy phones.
 
Apple is an enigma right now. Nothing they are doing makes much sense, and I think a lot of people are taking it on good faith that they know what they are doing because they have made a lot of money, and they are using that as the barometer. They went into this case losers no matter what the outcome. Samsung is now a household word and it was nowhere close to it before. Add that to losing the smartphone crown to Samsung, with Samsung number 1 now and Android the most popular mobile OS in the world. They might as well have funded the war on drugs instead. They'd be in the same position. Meanwhile, their new product offerings are all Android copies. Copied android features in iOS, a clone of the Droid Incredible for the iphone5, and a clone of the Nexus 7 for their next tablet. That's not what I call innovation. They are fully trying to "go thermonuclear" on Android and failing miserably, while backpedaling on the 4:3 screen size on their phones. They've given up with the iphone5 and gone proper HD size like normal phones have. They've given up on "nobody wants a 7" tablet" and are copying Google now by making one. These are not the decisions a market leader makes. That's something LG would do. Copy someone else's design. That's something ACER would do. Not Apple. It will be very interesting to see if Apple is even capable of coming up with an original idea anymore in the next few years because for the past few, all they've been doing is copying others and playing catch-up.
 
+Bob Jewels what about those of us who are not in contracts with carriers huh I am using a droid on a prepaid thru verizon cause if I switch to a actual plan I lose my unlimited data so yes the phones do cost that much for me and others who dont have the convenience of a carrier assisted upgrade.
 
First of all your picture with the gun would not do anything for Sa.,or Ap. Unless you have big connection in military contracts ,then somebody might wink.Secondly all Co. large and small,they copy,they lie,they sell out their employes ,everyday.Strong one win,the weaker lose,most law schools would be closed ,if it was not for big co.law suites.this fact of life in free economy,so sooner everyone get use to it the sooner we can deal with major social,economical ,plotical problems in the nation.Look at Japan,how many years they stole ideas from all over the world,now China is doing the same,stop being bunch of sissy screming executives and get on with work at hand. Create,inovate,produce,and sell.
 
+Scott Wilson I understand your point. Isolationism does not care about what other nations say. Besides, the biggest electronic market in the world is by far the US. The point is, Apple does not need the rest of the world to thrive. Samsung and every other foreign company out there does need the US market badly to remain competitive. 
 
Apple copied rim black berry.
 
I'm gonna copy paste my thoughts from another but similar post.

Apple is an innovative company and that it took them half a decade to come up with a great product such as iPhone?
No doubt about it....

...AND to claim that nothing looked and worked like an iPhone...
Well let's dig on that claim...

Ofcourse nothing worked like that...the technology had to catch up too. The idea alone isn't enough you need the technology to implement your idea. The ONLY thing I'd give Apple credit for is that they came onto the market with it first.

If you look at other companies and their product designs...they were all heading in the same direction. Only difference was that Apple was in its launch phase when some were only in design phase where others were in making a prototype.

But to say that because Apple came with its product first on the market no other company is allowed to launch its product is Bullsh*t. Especially if you can prove that you've been working on something similar before the iPhone launch.

Was Samsung influenced by Apple..yes. But to claim or to think that Apple wasn't influenced by other companies is bull too. Nitpicking on if the phone icon was green or if the icons were squares with rounded edges etc..is taking it too far as most of these stuff pre-date the iPhone and aren't really "invented" by Apple. Couldn't they have made a complete different logo or used different color? Sure...they could have but why fix something when it works just fine, prior art existed...ppl associated a green phone icon with pick up/call en red one with end call. But because it's somewhat same they should pay billions of dollars?

To use an analogy...Apple took the ingredients they thought would make a killer chocolate cake and made one. They didn't make the ingredients..they made the recipy. Now they say...because we made chocolate cake first...no one can make chocolate cake EVEN IF the recipy is different to theirs. If every company did it like that then we wouldn't have a choice between the hundreds of different TV's, washing machines, hell even packed rice...because that would dilute their trade dress and product.

I'm not hoping and I'm not that naive to think that I'll change all your minds toward this matter by typing up this post. BUT those who think that justice was done and that now we'll see more innovation etc...are kidding themselves. If Apple has its way they'll be the only company to sell its product...the only company to sell their chocolate cake...
 
How about just drop everything and make peace? Isn't that what everyone wants....no its all about money. Jeeze people are greedy
 
I say if you're going to copy someone, copy a winner -- kudos to Samsung. Copying does not apply to just the tech industry. The same can be said for just about any industry.  It can also be said of athletes.  Some of the most prominent athletes are copied -- at least, their style of play is copied or emulated by others.
 
I don't even care of they were copied, this is what happens in technology. For those that think Apple is innocent, you're delusional. Samsung paid the piper but will continue to make money. And where they are now with the S3 compared to the captivate days is night and day. Apple's iPhone is still one note, but a great note.
 
+Andrei C Zamfir And respectfully, Apple could not thrive if it wasn't for cheap asian parts and cheap asian labour. I'm sorry. Those incredible profit margins come from selling a device for 700 dollars that cost them 150 to make. Apple would be absolutely screwed without the rest of the world to do their work for them, and it is going to bite them in the ass very hard moving forward.
 
+Robert Fillingame If you want unlimited data on Verizon they have an exception for all of their smartphones:  Pay full retail and you can have unlimited data.  
This applies to iPhones, Androids, Blackberry (who?) and Windows phones.
 
No more copying since SGS2. Samsung should move on now and stop the infatuation with pesky Apple.
 
This whole thing is absurd. In the digital world we all know what a copy is. You take someone's source code and put it in your own application. You take the pixels of one thing and put it in your own.

Samsung at most imitated Apple. Yet people throw around the word copy as if it had lost all meaning. The point is, if what Samsung did (imitate) is now illegal, we are in big trouble. Should it be illegal for American motor companies to change directions and imitate the shift to smaller more energy efficient Japanese and European cars? Should it be illegal for Bing to imitate Google and slowly work on rolling out their own implementations of Google's features one by one?
 
God I love these threads. : ) THANKS MIKE
 
watever,,u say,,apple is the masterof techs,,
 
Multi-touch... developed at Bell Labs, Xerox PARC and even shown off in the form of tap & pinch to zoom to manipulate photos during a TEDtalks in Jan '06, some 10 months before Apple filed the patent... Samsung undoubtedly imitated quite a few things about Apple, but Apple patented other people's hard work & innovation then are using that patent to restrict consumer choice & harm competition... And people say Samsung are the bad guys?
 
+Daniel Yang
What about Xerox who were copied by Apple? A bit hypocritical of apple to cry when they think they are copied when jobs himself said they copied others but this is another example of Apple thinking they should be treated differently.
 
I have never liked Apple but would like to show my disgust by purchasing -1 Apple products.  And I definitely won't be buying that other Apple product that I wasn't going to buy either.
 
Samsung copies like a copy machine and that's why there are copy machines everywhere. Fax tried to be RIM and Palm and I don't have a fax machine let alone an Apple or a copy machine. I'm sad.
 
People say this will lead to a crisis in the technology system because  everybody will start patenting everything and be idiot enough to keep suing everyone and, in the future, the whole system will crash.

This will not gonna happen because Apple is the only company IDIOT enough to do that. And it is not creative enough to invent everything.
 
All I know it's I love my S2 , don't mess with my galaxy !
 
You can't really call a maker of consumer electronics a "master of tech". If they were masters, we'd all be raving about their server products. Not even Apple uses Apple server products, they are that bad. They use Microsoft Azure for iCloud. That has to be embarrassing for them that they have to use Microsoft server products for their own cloud offering. Apple is not really a tech company at all. They make exactly zero parts in their products outside of designing the metal cases Foxconn makes for them out of unanodised utility grade aluminum, and maybe designing the electronics boards that Asus makes for them. They don't even make their own processors. Samsung makes them. They didn't even design their processors. Arm Holdings did along with videologic. They are just standard PoP (package on package) configurations. You or I could call up a fab like TI, say we want an A8 Cortex with a PowerVR chipset in standard PoP configuration, get our name silkscreened on it, and claim we invented a processor. Apple is good at taking off the shelf parts and putting them together in a metal box, then marketing the piss out of it so they can charge a premium. That's their entire business model.
 
Yeah and now that they have a verdict to prove that Apple and Samsung are the same why buy an expensive ipad when a Samsung tab is the same? Hehe
 
+Mike Elgan  As an owner of a Samsung Galaxy Nexus, S2 Skyrocket before that, and a Captivate before that, I want to say that Samsung should have spent more time and money on designing a better touchwiz. I agree with the jury that Samsung products look like Apples iOS and that I am hoping that things change now because iOS should only belong on an Apple device for users who need that type of interface and design. The custom UI that companies like Samsung, Motorola or HTC are using is not appealing to me as an Android user. I don't care about what is ethical right or wrong mumbo jumbo when copying. I don't mind that a company will copy another company. I just don't like Samsung or any other company copying Apple because Apple design is not a good one (in many ways) for Android users. Part of the reason why I don't like Apple design so much is because it is a copy of a really old design. I like retro industrial stuff but only on actual vintage industrial stuff. Apple design copied much of the stuff from the 60's by the Braun company. http://j.mp/PgcBfJ 
 
The worst part of these tit-for-tat lawsuits is that its us the consumer who will pay the price.

The notion of innovation will soon be to higher risk, and that is a sad thing!
 
It's interesting in retrospect...has anything REALLY changed with the verdict?  Apple gets to claim its an innovator, Samsung will pay the equivalent of pocket change for copying cell phones and tablets, and my Samsung products will still be in use at my house (they won't magically vanish now that the verdict has arrived).  Hell, Samsung has a tablet-like system built into a refrigerator...when Apple does THAT, then I'll be impressed.
 
don't really care, I use windows mobile 8 :ninja: and have my Macbook screw a tablet. .
 
The real fact is that Apple is afraid of Samsung. Thats why Little APPLE baby cried before court...
SHAME ON BABY APPLE.
 
Touchwiz is the main reason I've stuck with HTC phones this far. Sense and to a growing extent stock android have been very attractive. Touchwiz plasters over that with ugliness. Having said that my contract is up this week and I'll be getting an S3 because the removable battery is still important to me when I go away. It's nice to be able to go from 0% to 100% in 10 seconds for the sake of carrying a battery that fits in my wallet.
 
looks like samsung is about to shoot apple
 
The iPhone ripped the iPaq design back in 2007, why so serious..? :)
 
Nothing are original even apple, they were copied from something become a thing.
 
Exactly. Samsung needed to copy Apple to gain tons of Money and to get Where it is now...and now the that is at top of the tops has the founds and the popularity in order to start to differenciate and be unique.
 
Apple - Easily edible by other companies. Why other companies do not eat apple - Apple is a bad apple
 
Impossible for the Jurors to have looked at each issue in the case and come to a decision in the short time they took.  

Apple's lawyers knew that a jury would never decide the case like an engineer, so they argued emotionally and won.  The judge's decision to exclude prior art by Samsug because it was not at issue was pivotal - it left Apple appearing to be the originator and inventor of all. 

The issue I see is that the Jury made Apple the originator and inventor of all this technology, and even sided on the "trade dress" issue, differing from several other courts.

Multi-touch was used by the Mitisubshi Diamond Touch technology in 2001,   Taiwanese chipmaker Elan Microelectronics, sued Apple over patent no. 5,825,352, filed in February 1996, which Apple settled for $5 million.  

Apple didn't invent windows. The Xerox PARC in 1973 did.  Team members from the PARC project and Steve Jobs developed the Apple Lisa interface beginning in 1979, and it was the first commercial graphical interface, released in 1984.  

The problem is a subjective decision - what constitutes a significant improvement in the prior art?  

Clearly, what Apple did was to superbly combine a lot of existing technology into a new type of device, a hand held computer that is touch operated.  

A lot of other companies were working on the same idea, which was obvious - the problem was getting the hardware to affordably support the concept.  

Does  being the first to bring a technology to market make you the inventor of that technology?  No.  It just entitles you to the profits from doing so.  The jury in the Samsung-Apple case made Apple the inventor, when all Apple really did was be the first to put it all together at a price the market liked.

So I would argue that Apple is really good at integrating other people's inventions into an item that can be delivered at an acceptable price to the market.  Do they really significantly improve the prior art?  In most cases I say no.  What Apple does extremely well is to combine prior art into a successful new product. 




 
 
lol like apple didn't copy idea's from other companies, like table from microsoft or smartphones from nokia, or tablet in sizes of 7' from samsung.
 
business is business, nobody copy nobody, this is innovation and inventing, as far as I know their all doing great and good. No loser but all are gaining
 
Great way of explaining it to both sides an the real losers who don't copy them
 
I agree. But I will also add that they improved on what was copied
 
honestly, it doesn't matter and I could give two shits.
 
+Roston Taylor They just market better. People still think that "windows is inferior!" to OSX, while Windows 7 is clearly better than OSX at this point. They don't really improve. They just sell the perception better.
Tim R
 
+Bob Jewels he was speaking full retail and many people who change phones often do pay full price for a phone. Also outside the US people often don't have the option of a phone subsidy .
 
Yes if by copy you mean produce a phone that resembles an i-phone from across the room, and every other phone ; a rectangle.
 
Am tired of this copying stuff I use iPhone have for years got sucked into the whole iPhone thing but after years of using one it wears off . something new comes along and apple gets worried didn't they know that getting the parts from Samsung that Samsung would show the world they can do better what is the iPhone ? i think people need to think Samsung because without them there wouldn't be one . And I heard this saying with people which is so true apple needs to stop biting the hands that feeds them . also one last thing I ask my daughter if she wanted a MacBook pro for her 18th she said no as she looking for a laptop that give her what she wants as she heavily into gaming . What teenager turns down a offer of a mac pro this clearly goes to show apple isn't good at everything but clearly wants the world to think that they are . 
 
Apple haters on Google+, who would have guessed?
 
No. Any serious discussion of Samsung phones always boils down to the same thing. Their high end phones are really great, but the only drawback is that they have compromised the look and feel with touchwiz.
 
Copy, improve... sounds like the japanese car industry. Worked for them. Amazing how the ghost of the bully steve jobs still roams around. This patent thing is insane. Apple is running out of ideas. The 4s had nothing compared to the 4. Siri ? What a joke.
 
no i am not an apple fan i have a galaxy nexus and even i know that samsung coppied apple...
cause i hate the look of ios and i hate the look of touchwiz
 
Samsung is much better than Apple...but Apple cannot accept this idea...
 
Tablet computing devices have existed for years, who's to say Apple didn't copy something that existed in 1994 ? As usual, the whole game is so that lawyers can make money...
 
The little bits of info I've seen on the web to me suggest IMO Samsung simply used the iPhone as a template on
 
if apple deals with porn industry they would have patented some positions ;-)
 
The idea that Samsung phones benefitted from copying Apple is just more reality distortion field.
 
+Robert Perry I guess anybody that doesn't agree with everything Apple does is a hater then, and not a true believer. Not everyone needs the Apple religion. Some of us own a little of everything and know when things are just things.
 
I love the Samsung hardware, but I don't want any rubbish software and UI tweaks (that make them look like iOS) on my device. Since Android 4.0 (ICS), there is a philosophy behind the complete design & style of the OS. Whoever changes it, did not understand the beauty of it. Therefore the only acceptable device for me will be a "Nexus".
 
Copy is good thing, we all copy one way or another, that is why, copy-paste is the most feather in any system. No copy, no improvement, no invention.
 
Scott.  I was just kidding.  I think Samsung makes the best Android phones.  I am just fine in the Apple ecosystem myself.  Everything works together pretty well and I have invested it in (music, movies, apps) which makes any type of switch difficult.  
 
"According to Apple we are the same product but at half the cost" -Samsung
 
It's never a good business to copy. Samsung behaved in a retarded manner. Why? Because the stated copying the absolute shit ideas from Apple. I mean, for sure they could have gotten better icons design and a better grid representation. But no, they chose to mimic the ridiculous 2007-ish skeuomorphic design from Apple's apps, which may have been hip then, but not anymore.
In full disclosure, I type this from the GTab 10.1 (which I believe it is a better tablet than the IPad2, but just as useless), and I own two Galaxy S2 (which I believe are many times better than the iPhone 4s).
Samsung deserves the fines for being stupid enough to copy stupid designs that are stupidly patented and stupidly enforced.
 
What I did find funny is that apple waited all this time after the company starts making good money to sue for things that is standard in smart phones today. I just can't believe that the icons they was suing over as well was valid. Doesn't apple know that similar icons is used in some applications like Tango using with the phone icon. Smh I'm a bit disturbed with the outcome of the case and with our current patent system. We need reform
 
A lot of Apple claims are plain silly. Clearly to monopolize than to compete in market. A lot of the features are natural evolution once you have a capacitive touch screen. All Oses implement feature from others. If Apple is so pure as not to copy why did they implement the pull down notification which is in Android from day one.
 
Me think Sammy is on right track,Japanese did it with making copies of American product....see post ww2 Japanese cars
 
+Alex Reusch I don't hate iOS so much as just wish the other 45 percent of it wasn't missing. It's like they made an OS and forgot to include the filesystem and a bunch of utilities. One of the reasons I'm so hot on MIUI right now is it's what iOS should have been. I can hand a handset with MIUI on it to an iPhone user and after a few minutes they are amazed at how much better it is. Did it at work all day Friday. The difference between the new Jelly Bean builds of it and say, using jailbroken iOS are night and day. Where with the iOS option you are constantly having to screw with cydia to do anything cool, and it's probably going to be unstable, and you have to hope you don't accidentally reboot and lose your jailbreak, you just have it all and more with MIUI, and it looks better, and it's smoother, and you aren't breaking the law using it. As much as I'm surprised to admit this, I like it better than stock jellybean. Like a lot more.
 
IF Samsung did copy, Apple should be FLATTERED... Copying is a form of Flattery.. I like my S3 red phone... It is MUCH better than my old iphone 4... it is much better, quicker... enjoy not being able to Facetime over 3g/4g iphone users.. 
 
and no, I don't believe Samsung is now number 1 because they copied Apple, but because they are able to increment hardware progress much easier than Apple. This coupled with the neckbreaking pace of software improvements (for both Android OS and the Google services) that Google puts on the plate, make the Galaxy series (Samsung's branded line of Android devices) the best combination currently.
 
if I were Samsung, I'd just go AOSP on the Galaxy devices and focus on differentiation via corporate services (encryption, security, VPN, remote management, IMEI tracking of stolen devices etc) and cross-hardware integration with their strong TV line.
 
+Scott Wilson that's the freedom of choice on Android. I personally love Jelly Bean, especially the decision to move away from this fancy (outdated) glossy look of everything. Jelly Bean is so simple, pure and clean. I also love the Roboto font.
 
+Alex Reusch I really dig the roboto font. I've got something close called SlateSense right now, but I guess at some point I'll have to figure out how to import it. Thing is, without even checking, I know I'm going to be able to do it somehow. That's what I like about Android.
 
IMO Samsung used the iPhone as a template but did not copy feature for feature. Whats stopping Palm, Microsoft, and HTC from suing Apple? These companies all had smart phone features / touch screens before Apple. However Apple did innovate phones with "apps" , to me that is more grounds for a law suite.
 
+Scott Wilson exactly. And nobody is going to sue you because of this ;-)

Google would never say: hey, you stole Roboto and copied it to your own custom ROM! They would say: Great Job!
 
That's the dumbest thing I've heard in some time. That's like saying apple is so popular cause the world is full of teenage girls. Samsung is popular because of bigger screens and the latest hardware. Apple is always a few years behind
 
That's simply the long history of evolution. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
Apple holding of patent for rectangular shape and rounded corner is ridiculous .It can be liken to Ford Motor holding patent for exchangeable parts for Model T or claiming patent for using 4tyres as wheel. Patent ought to be awarded for genuine innovation not something stupid as rounded corner.
 
+Hessam Moeini 
این آقا سمت راستیه شبیه توهه :)
پیرهنش هم اسکولارشیپه :پی
Translate
 
Iphone 5 will be nothing new, android already did it. Funny, the early reveals of the iPhone 5 looks awkward, maybe its the screens new 16:9 ratio.
 
We are Apple. Assimilation is inevitable. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated. We are Apple.
 
Apple gets ideas in their head. Like, people actually like 4:3 size screens when all their content is 16:9. Or nobody wants a 7" tablet. Or nobody wants bigger screens on their phones. Then they come up with after the fact justifications. They found out it's cheaper to market around problems than to actually fix them. They'll just make things up to justify mistakes. That was Steve Job's true gift. He could look right at you and lie to you and make you believe it. I still cringe a little when I remember him saying "You are holding it wrong" to justify the broken antenna fiasco with the iphone4. Who the hell does that? That takes some balls. And the defenders have one argument: Apple makes a lot of money. That's the entire defense of Apple lying to their customers. The sad thing is that works. People with less integrity will back Apple to the bitter end because they make a lot of money. Just like they backed the popular kids in highschool, and talked about how great the quarterback was even if he was a total dick. Some people are afraid of power, so they immediately roll over. Those are perfect Apple customers. I don't want to think. I just want the perception that I did the right thing without having to do any research. All I have to remember is that Apple is always the right answer, even when it isn't. Even when I know they are lying to me and America. Even when I know they steal just as much, or even more often than others. They make a lot of money, and are powerful, so I'll back them because in my mind they are "the winner", and I want to be a winner too!

It takes the entire market saying "yes, we want phones with bigger screens" or "yes, we want a 7" tablet" for Apple to completely go back on what they claimed as scripture, and commit blasphemy against themselves.
 
sincerest form of flattery.   Samsung wins. 
 
+Bob Jewels Well, of course if you buy them with contract they're "cheaper" but I'm talking about the net price of an unlocked iPhone vs an unlocked android phone. Yes, the Galaxy S3 is pretty much around the same price of an iPhone 4S but you can find great phones like the Galaxy Nexus for less than an iPhone 3GS. If I want a new and unlocked iPhone 3GS I have to pay more for what I paid for my new and unlocked Galaxy Nexus. The fact that you can get it for "cheap" on a contract has nothing to do with their true price. Don't believe me? See this: https://plus.google.com/114809694981451178696/posts/N6BHBH2v4BD
 
Its obvious you are not able to have any kind of objectivity here, Apple fans have no say in which is right or wrong, neither did Apple invented a lot of things they claim they did.
 
Looks like the "apple" didn't fall far from the tree.
 
HTC one x is the way forward, I don't much like the look of the galaxy s 3 and I used to own an iPhone but the only way to make it look different to every other iPhone is to jailbreak it, just my opinion
 
+Ernesto Ivan Ramirez The easiest way to handle the "apple didn't invent" anything argument is to come up with one thing they actually invented. It just so happens that to my knowledge, there isn't anything. Everything they've done is heavily derivative. Samsung has invented things. Microsoft has. Apple really hasn't. They aren't that kind of company. There's nothing really wrong with that on the face of it. It doesn't appear to be hurting them.
 
Not all apple haters on google + just doing what most people are on here giving a opinion on how they feel . I own a desktop mac my kids has iPads am typing this message with my iPhone my daughters use iPhones . Am just tired of this copying crap . I think it was in 2005 or 2006 I seen in a magazine that Samsung made a tablet and the same tablet was shown on a gadget show in the uk which I watched tablets wasn't a big thing back then and didn't hit off so I guess Samsung didn't bother shame if they stuck with it who knows would it be them taking apple to court of copying who knows .
 
+Theresa Fisher Same. I own the new ipad, a macbook pro, a macbook air, and I believe I still have a quicksilver tower somewhere in storage. Not all of us identify with our purchases to the point that we worship at an alter.
 
i love both samsung and apple but i think samsung might fly away with this deal
 
everybody is copying everybody that what we human do best, innovation is a really rare phenomena,and it didn't happen with Apple nor Samsung....
 
Apple finally realized that thier market share is continually reducing...should Samsung did not make a success, they won't bother to sue.
 
S3 is a great phone i hope samsung never stops making Android phones !
 
Does anyone notice the similarity between Apple and the early Colt fire arms manufacturer. Development is stifled when only one manufacturer wins.
 
Some truth in it as I used to love my Nokia phones but went with a little Samsung one back in the early 2000s and it was shocking and I said I would never get a Samsung again but post iPhone and their high end phones are superb and I have one now... although it is the Galaxy Nexus and would have probably got the 3rd gen Nexus regardless of manufacturer if it had similar a spec.
 
+Scott Wilson the reason outsourcing is so prevalent is because the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world. That is not Apple's fault. All those countries benefited from the labor and profits they made by contracting with Apple and other American companies. I do not care what it costs them to make, what I care is does it work as does it provide good value for what I am spending.
 
ima fan of samsung u dont see apple making cool ass tvs and if they did they charge u hella for it screw apple
 
Apple is anti apps cost more than on android because Apple engages in price fixing...hence the ebook suit. They wont let google bring free turn to by turn voice directions cause then they lose their % of the overpriced alternatives on IOS. This is why Apple is horrible and more expensive.
 
Thanks apple,android,samsung...for the revolution in phones
 
idiots!! they just don't have good ideas
 
I dont exactly know. What is being copied? Probably rectangular shape of ipads? So if it is that then is it so that customers are liking samsung only due to being rectangular shape. I dont think so.
 
If we never grew and expanded on the basics, nothing we have in our current day and age would exist. Bridges would have remained planks of wood, houses would be huts and fire would be our only heat source. Samsung took something and created something better. Where is the crime in that? If it is a crime and punishable go live in a hut with no electricity.
 
Wrong. Samsung had plenty of evidence that proved they actually didn't copy nearly as much as Apple claimed but it was dismissed by Judge Koh without so much as a brief gaze.

And this point is also moot because Apple copied, damn near plagiarized, a phone that was no where near as popular as the iPhone and still succeeded. This means that copying isn't actually the factor that made the brand successful.

1. Samsung made most of Apple's hardware

2. Apple's thriving off Samsung technology, from their parts, and aren't paying licensing fees, only up front costs

3. Apple convinced LG to settle out of court twice to avoid the issue going publicly and harming their business model

4. Apple stole the patents from up under them by patenting vague ideas and descriptive terms using a deceitful vernacular

No, these points ^ are why Samsung was successful. They didn't fail to innovate; they and LG were actually key innovators the entire time. You can't patent a shape but Apple found a way to. You can't patent someone else's technology, especially when already patented, but Apple found a way to.

What did Apple actually invent or innovate? Anyone actually know? Nope, none of you do. That's because they didn't. Anything you name had a source previous to Apple. They only gave it a name. I'm waiting for the hate messages and trolling. I'll repost this just so I have the chance to respond to this comments. Bring it
 
In order to make a durable smartphone, you need similar parts and functions. Look at a tire on a car. wouldn't you want it to be round, strong and look nice etc. 
 
And why should we listen to pundits any more than we do music critics? They're all no-nothing attention whores than have no valid credibility whatsoever and have usually accomplished absolutely nothing and are commenting on things that are extremely subjective. So why should we treat their opinions as though they matter more than our own?
 
+Dustin Jones A pundit is someone who is knowledgeable (or is supposed to be knowledgeable) about a specific interest area, and expresses his or her educated opinion on mass media. 

If you're not listening to the opinions of knowledgeable people, then who are you listening to? 
 
+Dustin Jones And that's all valid perspective, but the other side of the coin is why should I listen to facts I disagree with when I can attempt to discredit the source. I see a lot more of that in this thread than pundits.
 
so what? will this be the first time an idea has been copied?
 
Samsung did start off copying. But evolved into something special. What? And Apple didn't copy anybody right? Wrong? If their menu icon system, notification drop downs, and push app notifications seem familiar it's because they are. Rim had push notifications long before Apple. Apple was smart placing a patent on tech that someone else created. 
 
Apple sued because someone made a tablet.. on the shape of.. a tablet.. like apples iPad tablet.. that's like dunkn' donuts suing krispy kreme over donuts with holes in the middle.. apple made 1 billion.. they employ 47000 workers.. that's $21000.. plus $27000 in spare change.. employees got a pat on the back letter.. greed is a beautiful thing
 
apple in all has gone off the deep end of sanity and logic their attack on samsung is a blatant statement to those who prefer technology that is far more reliable than a problematic-rife mundane and over-priced level of technology thats has been overated for a great deal of time  and thus proves their is no sanity within apple as a beligerant and obviously hostile company and until this miscarriage of justice is overturned I call and urge all within the consumer level and those outside of apple to boycott not apple but rather its blatant financial tantrum to seize control and create the very nature of what it is showing a hypocrisy of being a conglomerate monopoly in order to make up for its unsuccesful and unreliable products under its namesake
 
+Scott Wilson Don't get sucked into that, man =/ That's just a black hole of opinions and emotional arguments in lieu of the facts. You get trapped in there and they'll troll you
 
Look apple seem to think the invented everything when infact they knvented nothing new,the prada was the first big touchscreen, and if it wasn't for the likes of prada,lg,sony,samsung and motorolla there wouldn't be any iphones,plus check out the hardware on an iphone most of it is manufactured by samsung,so in reality apple have copied more than most...
 
Yeah so us poor people can afford it and not be owned by apple and their overated brand....and greedy market!
 
The thing that bothers me the most out of all this is that instead of competing against each other companies are suing each other... I mean technology pretty much evolved from people using the ideas of others while adding their own touches to those ideas but i guess that's not really possible anymore since everything seems to have a patent...
 
Everything is a remix. There are only so many ways you can make a black rectangle.

Let it go people... The ones that mistakenly bought the other black rectangle thinking it was your black rectangle are not that big of a deal.
 
And the winner is HTC. This company will now use the opportunity to return to the market with better and cheaper phones. But anyway I think Apple is pathetic because they are using unconventional weapons to fight the competition. After all Apple cemented the fact: Mac against the whole world. 
 
If Samsung announced it was migrating all if its phones to Windows 8, Apple would forgive and forget. This isn't about Samsung. 
 
I agree with this article, samsung may have copied and then surpassed them, now apple have done the same thing previously, it ain't the exclusivity of crapple to copy even steal
 
iphone has a simple mode to used it, but the people has being to be a looser because they dont want to be smarter just press the icon and that's it, they has no more imagination they trust in apple but apple is making a stupid people everything that apple want the people just follow they rules, there's no more bluetooth connection, no sound efects even the worst quality sound has a lot of distorsion, but the people just dont want to noticed because they love apple
 
Wrong. Samsung succeed by exceeding Apple.  
 
that M60 pointing at the other guy who looks like a businessman lokks very tempting. do i or don't i pull the trigger? let me think a moment.... yes, i would 3:)
 
And Apple should credit its success with its own copying from Xerox.
 
+Andrei C Zamfir Sure, all true. That doesn't change the fact that Apple needs those foreign countries to exploit to continue raking in the cash. They can't do it on their own. Apple's business model relies on them not having the overhead of actually having to make anything themselves. So it's Samsung's parts in Foxconn's aluminum put together by Longua Technology Park in iPad City, Shenzen China. If they did it all themselves, like say Samsung does, they wouldn't make anywhere close to the profits they make now. They'll keep propping up firms and putting their money where they think it makes the most sense by buying up technologies to cut off markets to other people, and buying up patents to further cut off markets. It's cheaper for them to screw innovation, and by inheritance, their consumers. That's how you end up with the same basic phone being made for four years.
 
+Clark Graham Even better, they haven't actually lost in court yet. Like the prior four times, chances are it will be overturned and they'll win for the fifth time. Apple's case has no merit.
 
apple wins in tablets and phones but Samsung makes boss tvs and such
 
Apple =simple elegant and user friendly modifications only jailbreak specs on latest iPhone also there break through Siri.

Samsung =sleek open user interface bigger screens more RAM higher end processor modifications are endless root clock work mod roms under clocking and over clocking thus increasing performance our battery life also apple fails with no external storage support like the galaxy s three can be up to seventy five gigs or more

This all depends on the user but everything I stated above are facts for I own both devices on at&t
 
I think the who ruling is a shame, i new the outcome would be like that considering the jury was american, apple is american, no fairness
 
I brought a Galaxy S2 with NFC last year, 6 months later Apple showed off the new 4s it came with the Siri app ,,,, even though the 4s still looked exactly like the 4 ?

And Apple say that Samsung should stop copying and start innovating ?????
 
Well this means to me that my nexus 4 is actually worth more than I paid. Winning like Charlie sheen.
 
+Mike Elgan thank you so much for breaking up the What's Hot page monopoly of pro-Samsung news
 
+Peter Tomov and others who think that now HTC or another android running company will use this opportunity to gain marketshare...think again.

Now that Apple has such a win under their belt...they'll target other android OEMs such as HTC, LG etc...their main goal is to go thermonuclear on android as Steve Jobs wanted but they're not ready for Google yet. This is why they went after the largest OEM, Samsung.

Google purchasing Motorola gave them hold of some of the patents that they in turn now can use to leverage a deal out of Apple.

Plus this Motorola vs Apple lawsuit will take some of the heat off the android OEMs. Google wasn't going to remain silent forever. A new tech war is coming...which I think will seal the fate of android and Apple forever.
 
And apple copied everyone else. Steve Jobs said it himself...and I quote "great artist steal good artists copy".
 
since the palm pilot, newton, various windows tablets; shit man trek and the odyssey, this has been an idea to be explored relentlessly and has evolved since. The look of the physical device might be the same, though internally very different in terms of hardware. It should be understood that the bar had been raised, now instead of a newer better product coming to top what is available we see a lawsuit. And if that was not enough; Apple wins it only to defocate more garbage onto the public that is sub standard interms of its raw power. Its great to have a shinny screen that beyond high definition standards; though realisticly, it's only like 10 inches and I own an HD tv like alot of other tablet owners out there. I think I speak for most when I say I don't need something shinny, I need something that works and can get the job done. All aside apple presents people with a tablet that is nice but is geard to those who do not really understand how to fully utilize a device of this calibur by simplifying it to an extreme; where as the android experience is for the experienced user who is using it for a realy point of productivity.
 
Mike do you seriously think that these two jerks are pundits?? 
 
Samsung didnt copy apple and its still a winner
 
Excerpt:

The predecessor to the iPad, called the Dynabook, was conceptualized in 1968 by famed computer scientist Alan Kay. The device was envisioned as an educational tool and was naturally geared towards children, as evidenced by a 1972 research paper titled "A Personal Computer for Children of All Ages" that Kay published while working at the legendary Xerox Palo Alto Research Center.

Kay elaborates in an interview with Tom's Hardware:

"Of course, many things in the multi-touch UI, page turning animations, etc. were first done by the group of my friend Nicholas Negroponte at MIT. The idea of touch screen interaction also goes back to this community, both at PARC and Negroponte's research group at MIT that invented a multi-touch tablet in the 70s. One set of the machines we made, called 'The NoteTaker,' had a touch screen."

In a somewhat famous exchange, after Steve Jobs intro'd the iPhone, Jobs approached Kay (who used to work at Apple in the mid 80′s) and asked him if the device was "good enough to criticize." Kay responded, "Make the screen at least 5″x8″ and you will rule the world."

Source:

http://www.edibleapple.com/2010/04/30/from-alan-kays-dynabook-to-the-apple-ipad/
 
I am Samsung all the. I wonder how the copy can bs so much better. Apple is commiting suicide by countinueing to producw such small, fragile, and propriatry phones. Trying to sue because Samsung used the same technology in a better way. We all know in court the accused in this case must prove they could think of
the same thing in terms of touch screen technology.
 
But Palm DID copy Apple...have you seen any WebOS device?  It looks very similar to it, just some different concepts (cards, multitasking, etc)
 
Samsung copied Apple like Bombardier copied Embraer copied Airbus copied Convair copied Douglas copied Boeing. In other words, the precedent for patenting meaningless ideas like "look and feel" has long been established, and this case was decided on a faulty interpretation of patent law. Moreover, it ought to be drawing a lot more outrage than it is, possibly due to ignorance, because the only outcome is to stifle innovation. Let me say that again: Apple doesn't give two shits about the money, and if anyone testified that Samsung had cost Apple a billion dollars in anything but self-inflicted legal fees, Samsung should have questioned if they were mentally fit to give evidence. Apple's only goal was to make it that much harder for anyone else to succeed. This is not capitalism, folks. You are free to get angry.
 
Honestly, I don't care who copied whom. Apple's old mantra of copying the best bits of existing work to create a superior product is exactly what should be encouraged, provided that the finished products are sufficiently different in their final form. (A rectangle with rounded corners isn't enough similarly to count as that - that's the standard form of the product and it's a just a shape.) If firms could cherry pick to create the best products they would be forced to innovate to distinguish themselves from the competition, if even for a moment. But at the rate of releases in technology a moment should be enough.
 
Seriously, USA patent laws sucks. You need to reform! Try to read groklaw article about this case. Juror is patent holder guy, who claim patent on apparatus for A/V recording and playing.
 
Hey guys, the industrial Japanese potency grew up doing the same thing, coping and improving what they copy. That's how the japan movement appears, and that's why they have the best reliable cars in the market, so what's the issue with Samsung and Apple. Edison the "light bulb inventer" do worst things and look how history remembered!
 
Pepsi copy coke, every car manufacture copy Mercedes Benz, Toaster Strudel copy pop tarts, and God knows don't go down the cereal isles.
 
Apple and Samsung fan boys can kiss my a**.. I'm an ANDROID fan boy :-P
 
Jury agreed Samsung copied..so "officially" products are the same..other than price tag..to me Samsung won as Apple failed to prove their more expensive products are better..
 
I honestly was gonna get an iPhone 5 as a second phone to have the best of both worlds (Android and iOS), but Apple screwed themselves out of a consumer with all this nonsense. It's incredible how Apple thinks they can put a lawsuit on you because you supposedly copied the iPhone look. Last time I checked Apple didn't invent shapes and sizes, but of course that's what they'll want you to believe.

This is just as stupid as Nintendo going on to sue Sony and Microsoft because they were in the gaming industry after them (Nintendo). Get a grip, Apple. Stop fighting with lawsuits, and actually improve your iOS with noticeable improvements. 
 
Apple Copied apples and That's Why It Succeeded
 
Apple should be used to being copied by now. bill gates already did it and I think that if steve was still alive and running the company this whole case would have not happened because it made motorola counter sue and that will be a battle that apple can't win in any way.
 
samsung is bad whereas apple is good cause apple have designed something then samsung get one and change a few things around
 
Couldn't care less no skin off my teeth.
 
Whatever peoples stands Samsung's sides, but all I know that they stolen and copied from Apple's idea for smartphone and table
 
I have my doubts on the success of Samsung because their skin LOOKS LIKE THE IPHONE'S. Most people buy Samsung or any Android devices based on higher specs and the Android OS with its open ecosystem. Most consumers prefer the pure Google Android UI no shit on top. But price is its number one selling point. I have to say lately Samsung has made some very interesting move in hiring prominent open source developpers in its stable and have come up with original softwares/hardwares in the S3, even to make Apple jealous about. That I agree now Samsung is moving away from its once initial and boring UI. 
 
+frainkie stinklehoffer it would be nice if all sides could get along and compete fairly, but apple has pretty much declared war on android and by extension any manufacturers that use it
 
I don't know who copies who but my Samsung s3 is great I'm happy with it .
 
The worldwide economy without borders will kill copyrights laws as we know it today. Could you imagine the creator of the wheel copyrighting it's design.
 
y'know i dont really about this whole feud between apple and samsung
 
There no harm taking good points and proceeding with better and much useful features and apps. Samsung never copied any icons or logo of that of the apple. samsung on the other hand were smarter faster and efficient enough to innovate it's product rather just waiting over same old phones like iPhone which only gives good camera and different look to it's phones without any new features that is of an important to many of us. Also I think Samsung deserves a fair chance and re consider over this matter. And whatever you say guys..Samsung is value for money.
 
It's simple the one who designed the car is he the only person manufacturing yet??? It has 4 wheels, a Steering, 4 windows, 4 doors,a windscreen and a screen behind. How many companies filled it latter with the same concept???
 
you'll kill many people by using that!!!!
 
Apple supporters come to this post and think..."wow...anti apple sentiments on Google+" but you seem to forget that it is due to Apple's behavior towards android and its OEM.

Ppl don't like a bully and even more so when he's a narcissist...go figure. This lawsuit pissed off an already angered android fanbase but that is not the worst part. They pissed off many genuine undecided potential customers.

This case did one thing that Google didn't do too much themselves...bring Android in the limelight. This case has shown that android OS is on par with iOS..if not better, open-source and most importantly in certain cases also cheaper. Ppl do certainly know more about android now than let's say a month or two ago.
 
Hogwash.  As I've said many times.  People don't buy android phones because they are "like" iPhones.  They buy them because they they are not iPhones.  Either because they hate Apple (and you know plenty of people do) or because they don't like the iPhone's interface (gadzillions of icons) and prefer being able to use widgets.  

Samsung took off because Android is much more customizable and much more powerful than iOS.  There's a reason that Android sells more phones than iPhone and it's not just cost.  People trying to say that Samsung's success has anything to do with Apple are deluding themselves.  When I go looking for a smartphone I don't even consider iPhones because I don't like apple's locked down infrastructure and terrible screen layout.  
 
seems to me that the jury was biased for Apple (all American Apple Pie... etc.); from what I've seen, there were only a couple of possibly valid infringement issues.
 
+Scott Wilson I hope you do not own ant Apple stock nor any funds that buy it. Based on your logic, we should hate all companies who outsource and try to make a profit while trying to survive the highest corporate tax in the world.
To me, my 2 year old iPhone gives me a better experience and screen than any other phone. Not to mention much higher resale value. You do get what you pay for in life. A 4 year Mercedes is better than a brand new Hyundai.
 
don't care the brand.. i just use what i need.. :D
 
yes,copying basic design is standard in every consumer product, from the laptop (the earliest design of which apple mimicked as closely as samsung mimicked them) to the refrigerator to the flat screen tv. someone refines an optimal design and others start there.
 
Samsung is a better company. Apple fucks  you at every chance while you're being gullible!!!
 
+Andrei C Zamfir I quit playing the market in the 90's. My money is tied up in collectibles. Watches, lighters, comic books, guns, things that always appreciate in value because there are always collectors with money. And yes, you have a point. Apple is definitely struggling to survive. I hear they are barely able to stay in business. Thank GOD they have cheap labor. I know as an American, I applaud them shipping 650,000 jobs to China, screwing over the US, and I cry huge crocodile tears over their tiny profit margins. Feel silly yet?
 
Apple copied minority report(multitouch and pinch to zoom)
 
Apple did not even come up with original names for the iphone or ios, cisco own those rights
 
+Scott Wilson collectibles, very nice. 3 years ago my IT Job got outsourced to India. When I realized corporate taxes are highest in the world here I was no longer upset at my former employer. High taxes drive away business. What would any of us do if we owned a big business and we owed our investors and we had to make profit and we do not get bailed out because we don't believe in crony capitalism? We have to cut costs. And the biggest costs are labor.
Thanks for the talk.
 
I would say early Samsung smartphone were inspired by apple however they were not copied and they are now above and beyond apple phones
 
Android took off because it is free and ripped off apples innovations from day one. If I am a mfg. and have to choose between paying royalties to apple and getting android for free, which would I choose?


 
+Jim Dawson All accounts show that Android and iOS were developed at the exact same time. If anybody was ripped off, they both ripped off the LG Prada. It was the first big screen touchscreen phone and it predates both of them.
 
+ehsan azimzadeh آره هاااااا! خودمم اولش دیدم گرخیـــــــــــــــــدم :دی
چرا واقعاً؟
STEVE F
+
2
3
2
 
Apple has the market right now, but you can only fool people for so long! When the Iphone came out it was the shit, now it's the shit everybody wants to get rid of!
 
+Eric Friesen EXCELLENT POINTS! The patent system is out of control and Apple is taking advantage of the flaws present and  creating a market monopoly. In the start Samsung tried to emulate a lot of key features that made the iPhone 3g/s sell so well. THIS BEHAVIOUR IS NOT ILLEGAL. Its also not illegal to be "envious" of the iPhones success. Every manufacturer in the mobile space would want the same success, and share the same Envy. Samsung has really evolved now though, I would hate to see mas bans and android manufacturers crippled over totally ridiculous patents that should be invalidated. I mean take a look at the new Sony Experia. It shares a design theme around the Galaxy S II. To reiterate Samsung didn't get its success from "copying" Apple, they paid attention to what consumers wanted and made it work. If they did simply copy Apple, you would have what you see coming out of china in the way of an iPhone knock-off.
 
Samsung has always been in the running with regards to tech but apple bit off of Google wit its iOS software but nothing is being said about it. Now Samsung and Google are running the show and apple can't stand the fact that the iEverything has run its course. The iPhone is
 
Is basically syndicated its lost its flair and now there is a new iSomething every couple months where as Samsung is killing the comp.
 
If Samsung is guilty of patient infringement then at&t should have been able to acquire tmobile.... get it?
 
Personally I think the laws around patents are far too stringent, society will always progress with a culmination of ideas, I believe apple has started something that is progressing the way in which our society behaves and functions, and have relied on many of the ideas developed by all technology and by setting a new standard it is reasonable that any other developing entity should pursue this particular line of progression as this what the public has dictated how they might progress. Technology now underscores most of our known lives and has been incredibly useful to how we share ideas and improve our lives, so much so having rights to such particular design functions is like granting the rights and ownership and sole use of a word in our common language.

I think android and Samsung have given us an alternative to a product that has monopolized on how media is delivered and even stifled accepted delivery's of media (i.e. flash) to guide worldwide uses of networked media toward their own ends. This, through their popularity, has guided and created an efficient and well integrated system leaving us with only two choices improve on it or fall behind. Android provides us with more freedom at cheaper cost and one more open to a general consensus, need i mention its roots in Linux.

But what I believe is going on is not always the case what do you think, even as I write this on an iPad...


chery M
 
If that guy was alive, it would have been disgusting to see him gloat over the verdict.
 
Apple, the richest company in the Country has to worry about someone else copying their technology. Please.  This world would be pretty damn boring if ideas weren't spread around.  Keep it up Samsung and whoever else can add technology to the world.
 
South Korea's Samsung won a home court ruling in its global smartphone battle against Apple on Friday when Seoul judges said the company didn't copy the look and feel of the U.S. company's iPhone, and that Apple infringed on Samsung's wireless technology.

However, in a split decision on patents, the panel also said Samsung violated Apple technology behind the bounce-back feature when scrolling on touch screens, and ordered both sides to pay limited damages.

The Seoul Central District Court ruling called for a partial ban on sales of products including iPads and smartphones from both companies, though the verdict did not affect the latest-generation phones — Apple's iPhone 4S or Samsung's Galaxy S3.

The ruling affects only the South Korean market, and is part of a larger, epic struggle over patents and innovation unfolding in nine countries. The biggest stakes are in the U.S., where Apple is suing Samsung for $2.5 billion over allegations it has created illegal knockoffs of iPhones and iPads.
 
Nobody has copied anybody, apple should never have been granted patents half the stuff they have. Tablets are an old idea, heck they have them in Star Trek in the 80s!.
 
Is imitation the greatest form of flattery?
 
There will always be mac_heads, Apple does not ever have to worry. There will always be the trendies that want to know nothing but have everything, Apple does not need to worry. There are more if them than others.
 
Next up (and what I am waiting for) Apple vs Google about Android infringing on iOS
 
+Aaron Widner Yup. I believe Android stole voice actions, the notification bar, and over the air updates from Apple. They are criminals.
 
If Samsung never copied Apple, then Apple wouldn't have anything to copy for their next smartphone. Id be very surprised to see the next iPhone not have some more features that Android fans have today.
 
wow does the US patent system need an overhaul or what?  

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and it seems that companies have been flattering each other over and over.

Also, good artists steal (ideas), great ones straight up copy them (Picaso or T.S.Elliot you decide!)

Steve Jobs: Good artists copy great artists steal
A Andy
 
I thought Nokia is losing because they don't choose android.. not because they don't copy apple
 
+Mike Elgan Yes, Robert Scoble may be right that it was worth 1 billion dollar to become the number 2 mobile manufacturer.  A billion dollar representing about two weeks worth of net operating profits for Samsung.  It's true that the judge might triple the damages but then we're still only talking about 1.5 months of profits.   The real danger comes in whether there is an imposition of a sales ban, if Samsung has to pay continuing royalties to Apple, or whether it loses anything to its image or goodwill. 
 
Given Apple's long and rich history of ripping off other companies ideas it's a bit rich that they can sue Samsung over something as obtuse as "square icons with rounded corners". Then again a Korean company was never going to get a fair trial in the USA going up against the darling of the US stock market.
 
Aha Moment from Bloomberg interview of Val Hogan! "When I looked at the Software on iPhone and put in that processors ( presumably on Samsung processor) it would not work.. "  Did I hear that right? This was the Aha moment.. For a while Apple and Samsung had the same processor!
 
+Shyam Krishnamurthy I think Samsung uses different processor families on different series of phones.  Apple probably just uses the same family with incremental upgrades with each new version.

I suspect Apple does not make their processors.  I wonder if that is one of the parts that Samsung make for them...
 
+Scott Watson
 In the early days of iPhone it was nearly the same processor. Samsung took one of their APs and modified it for Apple ( added tons of memory on board).  Now it is different in many ways. The point is I did not get the Aha moment that decided the entire case and moved all the jurors in the direction that the foreman wanted.
Add a comment...