# Jury awards Apple $1.05 billion in Samsung patent dispute ruling



## Deleted_171835 (Aug 25, 2012)

The jury has awarded Apple $1,051,855,000 in damages in the case against Samsung.

The damages, by device, are:








http://www.theverge....damages-verdict


----------



## raulpica (Aug 25, 2012)

THIS THREAD WILL TURN INTO AN APPLE HATEFEST

OH GAWD


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Aug 25, 2012)

Guess you can't lose them all, eh, Apple?


----------



## chartube12 (Aug 25, 2012)

Bite Apple...bite them right in the motherboard


----------



## chavosaur (Aug 25, 2012)

When I first looked at the thread title on the home page, and couldn't read the whole thing, I thought it said
"Jury Awards Apple $1."
That would have made for a better thread then how this is gonna turn out...


----------



## DiscostewSM (Aug 25, 2012)

Seems Apple's source of income is no longer the consumers.


----------



## AceWarhead (Aug 25, 2012)

Oh great. Apple the Tyrant wins...


----------



## Gnargle (Aug 25, 2012)

Fucking unbelievable. I guess this means everything that's black, rectangular and has a screen infringes too, right?
Apple need to burn. Somewhat ironic coming from someone writing from a Mac, but they have some truly awful business practices. They don't want competition at all. Just the entire mobile space to themselves. God forbid another company try and produce a phone - Apple will sue them into the fucking ground.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Aug 25, 2012)

How hard is Samsung taking this? Have they released a statement yet?


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Aug 25, 2012)

Kind of sad. What were the patents infringed upon anyways?

Also, did Apple ever put that notice on their site saying that one company never ripped them off?


----------



## iFish (Aug 25, 2012)

This is great. Samsung got what they had coming and deserved. Samsung should've tried to innovate, like HTC, Motorola(new motorola, not the older, shitty one) or other Android skins(To be fair, I think all Android skins are shitty). But it may be too late at this point. Rather than innovating, Samsung piggy backed off Apple's success. Shamelessly, might I add.


----------



## Gnargle (Aug 25, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Kind of sad. What were the patents infringed upon anyways?
> 
> Also, did Apple ever put that notice on their site saying that one company never ripped them off?


Trade dress patents - i.e., some of the samsung products looked a little bit like apple products - and a few software patents - one, notably for 'bounce-back scrolling,' something present in every OS nowadays, and even other programs - I'm using Chrome now, and even that has it.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Aug 25, 2012)

Gnargle said:


> ShadowSoldier said:
> 
> 
> > Kind of sad. What were the patents infringed upon anyways?
> ...



Can you hear that? I think I hear Apple firing up it's Legal Machine, ready to sue anyone and everyone using this "patented" technology, now.


----------



## iFish (Aug 25, 2012)

TwinRetro said:


> Gnargle said:
> 
> 
> > ShadowSoldier said:
> ...


I'd like to add something. Stock Android doesn't have the bounce-back scrolling. So Samsung did add that themselves, trying to make it feel more like an iPhone.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 25, 2012)

iFish said:


> This is great. Samsung got what they had coming and deserved. Samsung should've tried to innovate, like HTC, Motorola(new motorola, not the older, shitty one) or other Android skins(To be fair, I think all Android skins are shitty). But it may be too late at this point. Rather than innovating, Samsung piggy backed off Apple's success. Shamelessly, might I add.


To be fair, samsungs "galaxy" range was better then apples Iphones. Not saying they had there slight similarity (Nothing to sue for though) but It seems like apples run by children who stop playing with something and only want to play with it again once someone else touched upon it.


and knowing samsung, they will try and make something to piss of apple :3


----------



## Bladexdsl (Aug 25, 2012)

any $ appl$ bribed the fucking judge i hate them more and more everyday their fucking pathetic i though mic was bad but they take their place anyday and will never use any of their i-crap/fad/garbage ever again


----------



## jalaneme (Aug 25, 2012)

greedy fucking apple, i hope they rot in hell for their greedyness, this will make samsung completely bankrupt, which is a shame, i like their phone and tvs, now that apple have the power to sue anyone they want and get away with it, that stupid judge has been paid off in apples favor, it just shows how disgusting the justice system is, why can't apple just lay off and let people make a choice in what they want to buy?


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 25, 2012)

jalaneme said:


> greedy fucking apple, i hope they rot in hell for their greedyness, this will make samsung completely bankrupt, which is a shame, i like their phone and tvs, now that apple have the power to sue anyone they want and get away with it, that stupid judge has been paid off in apples favor, it just shows how disgusting the justice system is, why can't apple just lay off and let people make a choice in what they want to buy?


Samsung won't go bankrupt, there sales are to high too. I have a samsung fridge, phone, tv and washing machine. I didn't even notice till about a week or so ago (When I did, I felt like I was trippin balls).


----------



## jalaneme (Aug 25, 2012)

king_leo said:


> jalaneme said:
> 
> 
> > greedy fucking apple, i hope they rot in hell for their greedyness, this will make samsung completely bankrupt, which is a shame, i like their phone and tvs, now that apple have the power to sue anyone they want and get away with it, that stupid judge has been paid off in apples favor, it just shows how disgusting the justice system is, why can't apple just lay off and let people make a choice in what they want to buy?
> ...



how much are they worth? there is no way they can pay 1 billion dollars and have money left over from that.

edit: LOL samsung are worth $247 billion, this court thing is pocket change to them, they will shrug their shoulders and move on.


----------



## iFish (Aug 25, 2012)

king_leo said:


> iFish said:
> 
> 
> > This is great. Samsung got what they had coming and deserved. Samsung should've tried to innovate, like HTC, Motorola(new motorola, not the older, shitty one) or other Android skins(To be fair, I think all Android skins are shitty). But it may be too late at this point. Rather than innovating, Samsung piggy backed off Apple's success. Shamelessly, might I add.
> ...


Being "better" is a matter of opinion. But being stolen isn't really an opinion at that point. The lawsuit isn't about who's "better".


----------



## triassic911 (Aug 25, 2012)

I can't believe Apple won this. You can't make an item that looks like an item without it being copyright infringement? This is surprising to say the least.





iFish said:


> This is great. Samsung got what they had coming and deserved. Samsung should've tried to innovate, like HTC, Motorola(new motorola, not the older, shitty one) or other Android skins(To be fair, I think all Android skins are shitty). But it may be too late at this point. Rather than innovating, Samsung piggy backed off Apple's success. Shamelessly, might I add.


I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not (and I hope you are), but Samsung did not deserve it. You seem to be heavily biased.


----------



## iFish (Aug 25, 2012)

jalaneme said:


> greedy fucking apple, i hope they rot in hell for their greedyness, this will make samsung completely bankrupt, which is a shame, i like their phone and tvs, now that apple have the power to sue anyone they want and get away with it, that stupid judge has been paid off in apples favor, it just shows how disgusting the justice system is, why can't apple just lay off and let people make a choice in what they want to buy?


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Aug 25, 2012)

jalaneme said:


> king_leo said:
> 
> 
> > jalaneme said:
> ...



They have a ton of different phones out there, they have dvd players, blu ray players, tv's, computer monitors, computer hardware. Dude, 1 billion dollars they can afford. Hell, Apple has around 40 billion. Now I'm not saying Samsung has as much as that, but they can afford 1 billion dollars.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 25, 2012)

iFish said:


> king_leo said:
> 
> 
> > iFish said:
> ...


After Judging my mothers iphone and a few of my samsung phones, They look, feel, work completely different. at this point the "Being Stolen" is an opinion, and for god sake iphones don't have a microsd card support.

~EDIT~
Also from memory there was an argument in the use of samsung parts in iphones.


----------



## jalaneme (Aug 25, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> They have a ton of different phones out there, they have dvd players, blu ray players, tv's, computer monitors, computer hardware. Dude, 1 billion dollars they can afford. Hell, Apple has around 40 billion. Now I'm not saying Samsung has as much as that, but they can afford 1 billion dollars.



yeah i've seen their wiki page and samsung are worth a lot, compared to apple, apple are just begging samsung for pocket change, it's quite sad really.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Aug 25, 2012)

they'll start suing any1 soon who has the letter i in the name of their product

fucking pathetic they are i dont know how their i-shit keeps selling if people knew what they were really like they'd have the same disgust like i have for them and wouldn't touch their battery sucking i-fads

futurama nailed it! http://www.tv.com/shows/futurama/attack-of-the-killer-app-1344482/


----------



## Joe88 (Aug 25, 2012)

I think there is an appeal


----------



## triassic911 (Aug 25, 2012)

Joe88 said:


> I think there is an appeal


Really? Source?


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 25, 2012)

Joe88 said:


> I think there is an appeal


If that's true, then good on samsung.


----------



## iFish (Aug 25, 2012)

king_leo said:


> iFish said:
> 
> 
> > king_leo said:
> ...


Do you know how stupid that sounds? Using Samsung parts means nothing. Apple bought them.

That's as stupid as saying Apple copied Intel because they use Intel CPUs. Apple is a customer to Samsung. It's not really stealing copying.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Aug 25, 2012)

Statement from Samsung

_"Today's verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple's claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer."_


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 25, 2012)

iFish said:


> king_leo said:
> 
> 
> > iFish said:
> ...


I never once said it was stealing or copying, It goes to show how apple can be a dick to a trusted supplier. there was an argument before of people complaining of the use of samsung parts in iphones. Don't shoot the messenger.

Btw: http://live.theverge.com/apple-samsung-verdict-live/
For a tad more info (Found that on the sources website)


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 25, 2012)

So apple once again wins in rigged trail, congrats you greedy, selfish fuckwits. 

If Samsung is appealing then good on them for not just sitting down and letting crapple walk all over them, lets hope Samsung will continue to actually innovate the smartphone market while leaving crapple behind copying Android features and selling their overpriced rubbish.


----------



## iFish (Aug 25, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> So apple once again wins in rigged trail, congrats you greedy, selfish fuckwits.
> 
> If Samsung is appealing then good on them for not just sitting down and letting crapple walk all over them, lets hope Samsung will continue to actually innovate the smartphone market while leaving crapple behind copying Android features and selling their overpriced rubbish.


They were innovating?


----------



## J-Machine (Aug 25, 2012)

iFish said:


> king_leo said:
> 
> 
> > iFish said:
> ...


All I know is if a company ever bought my product to make their own product then turn around and sue me I would stop doing business with them.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 25, 2012)

iFish said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > So apple once again wins in rigged trail, congrats you greedy, selfish fuckwits.
> ...


Alot more than crapple.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Aug 25, 2012)

Microsoft is sure taking this well.


----------



## iFish (Aug 25, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> iFish said:
> 
> 
> > Just Another Gamer said:
> ...


What's did Samsung do to innovate? I bet S-Voice is a huge innovation and totally not a clone of Siri.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 25, 2012)

iFish said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > iFish said:
> ...


Oh and I bet the icrap is worth its price when you can get the SGS3 for the same price.


----------



## Izen (Aug 25, 2012)

This ruling makes my iPhone look worse. I didn't know rectangles and grids could be patented. I guess I do now.

If anyone ever mistook a Samsung phone for an iPhone after actually holding and interacting with an iteration of each, they aren't competent enough to use a smartphone, anyways.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Aug 25, 2012)

iFish said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > So apple once again wins in rigged trail, congrats you greedy, selfish fuckwits.
> ...



Innovating and improving in all aspects compared to Apple, yes.


----------



## iFish (Aug 25, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> iFish said:
> 
> 
> > Just Another Gamer said:
> ...


Yeah... it is... Because the iCrap is actually going to get updated to the next firmware update.


----------



## triassic911 (Aug 25, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> iFish said:
> 
> 
> > Just Another Gamer said:
> ...


I agree wholeheartedly. It has been made apparent that iFish is an Apple fanboy.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 25, 2012)

iFish said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > iFish said:
> ...


Whoop de doo a new firmware update.
this changes everything
(The hardware in the SG3 overrules iphone 4s any day.)

On a side note:
Sg3 is one of the most innovative phones on the market, they have so many features big and small, it also isn't money scabbing and like most phones has a micro sd card slot >.>


----------



## Shuji1987 (Aug 25, 2012)

I really don't get this. It's just sad that there has been ruled in Apple's favor over things like round rectangular designs, bounce-back-effects and  slide-to-unlock etc 'patents'. First of all, I do not get how you can get a pattern on shit like that in the first place, second thing is this has been done WAY before Apple even came into the phone market. Truth is, Samsung already had round black rectangular phones and phones also had slide to unlock before that.

It's like Sony taking the SNES controller configuration, slapping two sticks on it and patenting that and then trying to sue Nintendo for damage losses due to similair designs..

But I guess it doesn't matter. Apple will get what is coming to them and it's called Google. Google patented the notification panel and guess what, Apple has that. I wonder where they got that idea from? Anyways, it's just too sad that Apple is such a butthurt company trying to crush any company who has any similairity with their products.


----------



## iFish (Aug 25, 2012)

triassic911 said:


> ShadowSoldier said:
> 
> 
> > iFish said:
> ...


I'm not going to say I'm not an Apple fanboy. But I will say that's not why I'm happy. I own a Galaxy Nexus, I like Samsung as a hardware company. My TVs are samsung and home appliances. But I do believe Samsung took a lot of inspiration from Apple. Too much to the point where the software is so similar and fuck, even the charger looks goddamn identical. 

Also, I'm a happy Galaxy Nexus owner


----------



## ouch123 (Aug 25, 2012)

Good artists copy, great artists steal. Patents are used for all the wrong reasons now.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 25, 2012)

iFish said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > iFish said:
> ...


Oh yes from features already available on Android since Froyo, oh yes crapple is the king of innovation if innovation means stealing and saying I made it.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Aug 25, 2012)

iFish said:


> triassic911 said:
> 
> 
> > ShadowSoldier said:
> ...



Honestly, there's no point in even bothering getting into a discussion about this again. Last time this happened you brought up stupid points, at least I think it was you, about chargers and shit. There's a difference between inspiration and blatant copying, Samsung was inspired no more than Sony was inspired to enter the gaming industry.


----------



## 431unknown (Aug 25, 2012)

Anyone that looks at what the complaint was about and says that the shit don't look too similar is just plain smoking crack.


----------



## iFish (Aug 25, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> iFish said:
> 
> 
> > Just Another Gamer said:
> ...


The only thing I know of that got ripped from Android was Notification Center. But nothing else. And this is an argument between Apple v. Samsung.
Don't turn it into an Apple v Android thing. What has Apple stolen directly from Samsung? Tell me. I'm all ears.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Aug 25, 2012)

Samsung did derive inspiration from Apple, yes. Although I'm not sure this is good for innovation in the smartphone industry at whole with basic parts of the UI being patented.



iFish said:


> I'm not going to say I'm not an Apple fanboy. But I will say that's not why I'm happy. I own a Galaxy Nexus, I like Samsung as a hardware company. My TVs are samsung and home appliances. But I do believe Samsung took a lot of inspiration from Apple. Too much to the point where the software is so similar and fuck, even the charger looks goddamn identical.
> 
> Also, I'm a happy Galaxy Nexus owner


I agree with you on most things but the charger isn't exactly a point to be argued. It's used by a number of companies due to its slim design.


----------



## 431unknown (Aug 25, 2012)

iFish said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > iFish said:
> ...


Well knowing how the users on here are they are going to say that they just stoled 1.05 billion dollars out of their wallet.


----------



## iFish (Aug 25, 2012)

soulx said:


> Samsung did derive inspiration from Apple, yes. Although I'm not sure this is good for innovation in the smartphone industry at whole with basic parts of the UI being patented.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Fair enough. The charger part was over board. I still kinda think they could. But you're right it's not a good point.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 25, 2012)

iFish said:


> The only thing I know of that got ripped from Android was Notification Center. But nothing else. And this is an argument between Apple v. Samsung.
> Don't turn it into an Apple v Android thing. What has Apple stolen directly from Samsung? Tell me. I'm all ears.


Then you probably didn't pay attention but I guess trying to convince you is hopeless since you plan on defending and putting crapple on the pedestal and saying how Samsung deserves this and other shit like this. I sure hope crapple's reputation is ruined because of this.


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 25, 2012)

I hope Samsung could learn a little bit more about customer care in some 'minor' regions through this case. 

By pricing a phone based on HYPE and having horrible customer service is the worst thing you can do, Samsung. 

Although this is totally unrelated to this patent case, hopefully this $1b will teach them not about phone design (I like their phone designs), but improving other aspects of their company infrastructure.


----------



## Shuji1987 (Aug 25, 2012)

Also, take a look at this. Apple think they are some kind of special snowflake, but they are not.





_The F700 was first introduced in 2006 and went on sale in early 2007. The iPhone 3, using the allegedly Apple designed style was released on the market in mid 2007, almost 5 months AFTER the Samsung F700._

So yeah, neither their grid system nor design is original. Seriously did the court even do their homework? -_-


----------



## Urza (Aug 25, 2012)

Shuji1987 said:


> _The F700 was first introduced in 2006 and went on sale in early 2007. The iPhone 3, using the allegedly Apple designed style was released on the market in mid 2007, almost 5 months AFTER the Samsung F700._
> 
> So yeah, neither their grid system nor design is original. Seriously did the court even do their homework? -_-


Did you do your own homework before spreading known false information?

http://androidcommunity.com/who-was-really-first-apple-vs-samsung-story-truly-debunked-20110420/


----------



## ouch123 (Aug 25, 2012)

Urza said:


> Shuji1987 said:
> 
> 
> > _The F700 was first introduced in 2006 and went on sale in early 2007. The iPhone 3, using the allegedly Apple designed style was released on the market in mid 2007, almost 5 months AFTER the Samsung F700._
> ...


Sounds like the article concludes it's ambiguous though, not that it was the other way around, but a good find nonetheless.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Aug 25, 2012)

Everyone stole the grid system from Nintendo.







Those thieves. 

(just joking)


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 25, 2012)

ouch123 said:


> Urza said:
> 
> 
> > Shuji1987 said:
> ...


Seeing that it comes from an android based blog, this should be reliable enough.


----------



## Thesolcity (Aug 25, 2012)

So I'm guessing no one looked at/ignored these, right?



Spoiler














Spoiler











Oh, and here's a report detailing how "Touchwiz" was made to mimic the iOS UI. I don't consider myself an Apple fan, nor do I like the system of copyright currently in place, but facts are facts.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Aug 25, 2012)

I'm going to be honest, on smart phones these days, how can you do anything that doesn't use a grid system and still works with apps? Having a grid system just makes everything so much easier to navigate through. I mean, if that's one of the arguments Apple used to win, then technically, couldn't Microsoft sue Apple for using the grid system on their computers?


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 25, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> I'm going to be honest, on smart phones these days, how can you do anything that doesn't use a grid system and still works with apps? Having a grid system just makes everything so much easier to navigate through. I mean, if that's one of the arguments Apple used to win, then technically, couldn't Microsoft sue Apple for using the grid system on their computers?


It's not exactly about the grid system, or even about Android OS. 

Samsung made use of TouchWiz (or any other sort) to tweak some of the build-in Android OS aspects to match some parts of the iOS. The base android build had none of these at all/very little.


----------



## Shuji1987 (Aug 25, 2012)

Urza said:


> Shuji1987 said:
> 
> 
> > _The F700 was first introduced in 2006 and went on sale in early 2007. The iPhone 3, using the allegedly Apple designed style was released on the market in mid 2007, almost 5 months AFTER the Samsung F700._
> ...



Wikipedia: _A Korean design patent for this black, rectangular, round-cornered phone was filed by Samsung in December 2006 prior to the release of the image of the iPhone._

So you can still argue about this  The blog probably missed that patent filing and therefor makes their whole article invalid, even with the best intentions they had. In my opinion it could have also been pure traffic generation for the website. Wikipedia > some android community I don't know the credibility off.


----------



## ouch123 (Aug 25, 2012)

Shuji1987 said:


> Urza said:
> 
> 
> > Shuji1987 said:
> ...


Do you know the credibility of the source Wikipedia got that information from? Just sayin'.


----------



## Thesolcity (Aug 25, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> *I'm going to be honest, on smart phones these days, how can you do anything that doesn't use a grid system and still works with apps*? Having a grid system just makes everything so much easier to navigate through. I mean, if that's one of the arguments Apple used to win, then technically, couldn't Microsoft sue Apple for using the grid system on their computers?



What do you mean by grid?


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 25, 2012)

Shuji1987 said:


> Urza said:
> 
> 
> > Shuji1987 said:
> ...


For me, it would be the other way round. Before you rage at me or whatever, let me explain why.

An android community will normally do whatever it takes to be pro-android and anti-apple. However, in this article, they aren't protecting Samsung (which uses an Android OS). Even though they didn't say anything nice about Apple, I would have expected them to say things like APPLE CHEATS instead of this.

Wikipedia is _very popular_ and it's an open source community. People can amend the information to whichever way they like (don't let me get started on the Seen Lee incident). On an android community forum, they are (should be) much lesser known than a giant web book like Wikipedia.


----------



## Thesolcity (Aug 25, 2012)

chris888222 said:


> Shuji1987 said:
> 
> 
> > Urza said:
> ...



Hi, Devil's Advocate here. I'm just going to throw in that any serious project that uses Wikipedia as a source is almost _NEVER _taken seriously. That is all.


----------



## Urza (Aug 25, 2012)

> In my opinion it could have also been pure traffic generation for the website. Wikipedia > some android community I don't know the credibility off.


Opinions are not substitute for fact.

http://www.samsung.c...o?news_seq=3516
>February 8th, 2007: Samsung today announced a new addition to its Ultra portfolio with the introduction of Ultra Smart F700. This revolutionary mobile phone will be showcased at 3GSM World Congress, the largest telecommunications event, next week.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Aug 25, 2012)

Urza said:


> > In my opinion it could have also been pure traffic generation for the website. Wikipedia > some android community I don't know the credibility off.
> 
> 
> Why would you form an opinion on a fact instead of actually doing research?
> ...



But.. that's when people seen it. They could have had the patent before people seen it.


----------



## Shuji1987 (Aug 25, 2012)

ouch123 said:


> Do you know the credibility of the source Wikipedia got that information from? Just sayin'.


Korean patent database: http://eng.kipris.or.kr/eng/main/main_eng.jsp
Honestly don't ask me how to look it up, I have no idea how that works but I do remember being xfered there from another site to the patent itself.

Or the source quoted by Wikipedia, Bloomberg:
http://www.businessweek.com/printer/articles/16106-apple-s-war-on-android

I still choose any of the sources over the android community though. It's not that I have any issues with communities or Android or whatever, it's just that other sources are more credible. Also Urza, introducing/revealing doesn't equal a patent filing.


----------



## Urza (Aug 25, 2012)

My only claim here is that the information you attempted to convey in the image you posted is completely false. The F700 was not shown at CEBIT 2006, and you should actually do research before spouting nonsense.

I also haven't even mentioned patents, so I'm not sure where you get the idea I'm trying to equate anything to anything.


----------



## lokomelo (Aug 25, 2012)

how about this?


----------



## Shuji1987 (Aug 25, 2012)

Actually on that subject, I agree Urza. I knew this phone had a patent filing in 2006 so I looked up the first image on google and copy pasted the text on the first site lol. So for that I apologize for being lazy.


But to avoid confusion, I am talking about the patent filing of the SGH-F700. The unveiling of the device in feb 2007 is a whole different thing. The timing to unveil it a month after the iPhone to the public may very well be shit timing on Samsung's part though.

Anyways, if you think about it, Samsung can not slap a device ready from scratch to shipped-off in a month time. Just think about the whole R&D process, the development of the OS, the research on how to ideally build and manufacture the device, the materials required to make it, the machinery and location to assemble all of it. It's just a few of the things I can think off. It's simply impossible that Samsung thought:"Omg, cool device 4ppl3 made lololololol. Let'z rip that off GAYS!!11!" as there simply no such resources available to get that done.

My point of view is basically, either Apple took some inspiration from that very patent filing (which I find highly unlikely as well due to time and resources as well) and we basically got two very similar devices with Samsung having a crap timing, or the last and most likely of all: The natural evolvement of smartphones.

Sony did it before, LG did it before as well as Samsung as well as many other companies. Apple didn't invent a holy grail as they want it to appear. So I just don't get why they act that way and why people even agree with them on that part.

edit; jeez so many spelling errors and grammar mistakes.. Time for bed I guess.


----------



## IBNobody (Aug 25, 2012)

I figured this would happen. It's a sad day for the US consumer.



On the brighter note, Samsung is still cleaning up overseas.


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 25, 2012)

Now, I wonder if Samsung would still manufacture those Ax chips. 

On the other hand, Samsung please improve your company infrastructure. I really have no objection against your phone designs or TouchWiz, but no other company takes 5 working days to actually fix a minor phone issue, plus you delayed mine for an extra 3 working days.

Also, $670 for a Galaxy S III with contract is downright atrocious.


----------



## Shuji1987 (Aug 25, 2012)

chris888222 said:


> Now, I wonder if Samsung would still manufacture those Ax chips.
> 
> On the other hand, Samsung please improve your company infrastructure. I really have no objection against your phone designs or TouchWiz, but no other company takes 5 working days to actually fix a minor phone issue, plus you delayed mine for an extra 3 working days.
> 
> Also, $670 for a Galaxy S III with contract is downright atrocious.


Really $670 with contract? O.o What would the duration be? 1-year I guess?

I got mine on a €25,- p/m 2-year contract and I got the phone and first 4 months free of charge. I got it two weeks after the release so I can't complain I guess.


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 25, 2012)

Shuji1987 said:


> chris888222 said:
> 
> 
> > Now, I wonder if Samsung would still manufacture those Ax chips.
> ...


Singapore has it at around S$600 - S$700 depending on carrier (~ €450) at a plan of S$30 p/m with zero data (~ €20).

You can get the phone at about S$450 - S$550 with a data plan from S$45 p/m onwards (~ €30).

The plans just have caller-id. Contracts are ALWAYS 2 years (Renewal can be done on 20th month)


----------



## triassic911 (Aug 25, 2012)

Urza said:


> My only claim here is that the information you attempted to convey in the image you posted is completely false. The F700 was not shown at CEBIT 2006, and you should actually do research before spouting nonsense.
> 
> I also haven't even mentioned patents, so I'm not sure where you get the idea I'm trying to equate anything to anything.


If this was a year ago I would look at you as a big jerk. However, I now see why you make these statements. One must have credible sources and have all the facts before stating anything in an argument. I wish more people on these forums were like you, but sadly these are younger people who are still a bit naive.


----------



## Krestent (Aug 25, 2012)

I'm going to regret posting this....
I think those Samsung documents comparing their phone to the iPhone may have played a big factor in the verdict.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Aug 25, 2012)

I read some more details on the case and honestly, Samsung deserved the verdict. Reading through one of their documents, it's clear that multiple UI elements were blatantly copied from iOS.

But I have issue with the entire nature of the patent system. If basic UI improvements can be patented, what does it mean for innovation on smartphones? These are clear UX improvements that I would like carried over to _all_ devices but with the current system, we're restricting certain basic things to one manufacturer.


----------



## triassic911 (Aug 25, 2012)

soulx said:


> I read some more details on the case and honestly, Samsung deserved the verdict. Reading through one of their documents, it's clear that multiple UI elements were blatantly copied from iOS.
> 
> But I have issue with the entire nature of the patent system. If basic UI improvements can be patented, what does it mean for innovation on smartphones? These are clear UX improvements that I would like carried over to _all_ devices but with the current system, we're restricting certain basic things to one manufacturer.


You are right in that advancement feels restricted. That's just how the cookie crumbles, I suppose.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Aug 25, 2012)

triassic911 said:


> soulx said:
> 
> 
> > I read some more details on the case and honestly, Samsung deserved the verdict. Reading through one of their documents, it's clear that multiple UI elements were blatantly copied from iOS.
> ...



Well, the cool thing about a democratic society is, if enough people with enough money decide to make a big stink over the current patent system, it will be changed. That seems to be a long way off, however.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 25, 2012)

Comparing one phone to other phones is not necessarily wrong, It just means for the people who use the phones only get the best, not something that nobody would buy.

I would rather be sticking up for a phone which tries to make my money worth spending (Samsung)


----------



## Foxi4 (Aug 25, 2012)

> On Apple's *"pinch and zoom"* '915 patent, the jury found that Samsung infringed on all but three products. (...) For the *"double-tap to zoom"* '163 patent, the jury found that Samsung infringed on a wide number of products, but not all. (...) Finally, the jury ruled that *all of Apple's patents are valid*.


While some patents were infringed (the overall look of the menu is too similar and it's hard to miss that) I have a problem with the double-tap and the pinch and zoom ones. Double-tapping is a simple input method, pinching is as well - touchpads and touchscreens used them for years now. Hell, my ASUS laptop uses pinching to zoom - is ASUS in danger now as well? To me, it's the equivalent of patenting *"Press W S A D to walk" *- somebody should promptly patent it for video games. Aparently all you have to do to patent something is take an existing idea and link it with a function in your software.

Some things are actual original ideas that are patentable... some things aren't and should never be patented in the first place.


----------



## Foxi4 (Aug 25, 2012)

-Wrong tab! Reported myself already, sorry!-


----------



## shakirmoledina (Aug 25, 2012)

no wonder we are still waiting for the iphone 5


----------



## iluvfupaburgers (Aug 25, 2012)

well, this sucks. the only ones really affected are the consumers. i seriously dont understand much how people can be saying that both phones look alike. i have the samsung gs2 and i have used iOS aswell, and touchwiz doesnt feel like iOS at all. and for gods sake, the phones might look alike because well, how else can you make something that is pretty much a screen. all phones look alike now a days. at least from my perspective. now i think its more about hardware specs and software more than looks since they all look the same


----------



## ferofax (Aug 25, 2012)

What a joke. What a fucking joke.

I bet all of the jury members had a slice off the Apple pie.

EDIT: Also, Microsoft should sue every software company out there for all they're worth for copying the concept of "Cut Copy Paste". There, did I do it right, Apple? That's how your patents are, basically.


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 25, 2012)

It's a fact that Samsung did copy some of Apple's stuff.

It's also a fact that some of Apple's patents are plain BS already so widely used but they still want to use it against Samsung.

Apple, you should really consider manufacturing your own SoCs.


----------



## Mantis41 (Aug 25, 2012)

I find this ridiculous. You can not patent every little idea. This will just destroy competition and lead the way to even more rediculous patent hoarding and litigation.


What if:
Xerox had patented the alto so no other manufacturers could develop a GUI desktop and folder, icon based system.
Id had patented the Wolfenstein 3D design so no other company could ever make a 1st person shooter.
Universal had patented the general design for Space Panic so there would never be any other platform games from any other companies.
Imagine having patent infringements for the toaster, the washing machine, the fridge, the kettle, the microwave, the oven. They all look the F'ing same.


A very dangerous decision has been made in my opinion,


----------



## AlanJohn (Aug 25, 2012)

lokomelo said:


> how about this?


Apple would only waste their time to sue these companies, they're worth not more than $30,000.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Aug 25, 2012)

Mantis41 said:


> Id had patented the Wolfenstein 3D design so no other company could ever make a 1st person shooter.


if only they did than we'd be rid of shooters 4ever!


----------



## zygie (Aug 25, 2012)

Samsung may have "deserved" the verdict, but that's nothing to worry about.

My problem with this case isn't with the "blatant" copying Samsung did, but the bigger picture. Patenting "rectangles with rounded edges" seem to be quite a stretch, as with the whole "slide to unlock" thing. What radical design would be ergonomic and non-infringing? Samsung took some steps with the SIII, but in the end it's still a rectangular device with rounded edges. Serious revisions need to done to patent law. And doesn't the US review anything that would lead to a monopoly? This is the first small steps to a monopoly, if it would lead to banning the sales of these devices. If an iPhone didn't suit my needs and I needed a different phone but it wasn't being sold because it looked like an iPhone, then what are my choices?

Anyone who holds even the most similar Samsung phone and an iPhone would be able to tell the difference, or does that say anything about the intellect of the average person? I really hope it isn't like that.

Unrelated, but with customer service, Apple really isn't all that good in certain countries as well. It tooks 2 full weeks for my brand new, unused iPad 3rd gen to be replaced just because of a small speck of dust under the glass of the screen, and did I say brand new? Unfortunately enough, the one who bought it never bothered to check properly, but the store didn't check properly either.

That $1b should pay for more lawsuits, I reckon. Who's the next big target?


----------



## TheDreamLord (Aug 25, 2012)

Well folks, who wants to sit back and watch Samsung explode? Waiting for the SamsungIIII with a quad core 3.3GHz CPU, which is called Pihone.


----------



## Satangel (Aug 25, 2012)

Fuck that, so obviously biased this 'court' towards the own company. The only loser here is the consumer, us.
The more competition there is and big players there are in the mobile world, the better, this is just a disgrace. I hope loads of people hear of this and hopefully it damages Apple a lot more than 1 billion dollar.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 25, 2012)

Satangel said:


> Fuck that, so obviously biased this 'court' towards the own company. The only loser here is the consumer, us.
> The more competition there is and big players there are in the mobile world, the better, this is just a disgrace. I hope loads of people hear of this and hopefully it damages Apple a lot more than 1 billion dollar.


I hope for that as well, crapple doesn't deserve to win and I hope it finally shows its fanboys that they are a childish, selfish, greedy and stealing company.


----------



## Cartmanuk (Aug 25, 2012)

*	Apple and Samsung get banned in South Korea*


It appears that South Korean courts are less biased.

The court ordered Apple to pay 40m won ($35,000; £22,000) in damages to its South Korean rival, while Samsung was told to pay Apple 25m won.




Source


----------



## Flame (Aug 25, 2012)

in Soviet Russia, apple eats you.


i really hate apple, how can a company be soooo evil.


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 25, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> Satangel said:
> 
> 
> > Fuck that, so obviously biased this 'court' towards the own company. The only loser here is the consumer, us.
> ...


Neither side is good anyway. Apple is simply abusing the use of patents, while Samsung indeed copied parts of iOS into their modified Android OS. 

Samsung never needed to copy these iOS things into the software at all. Heck Galaxy Nexus uses a true Android OS and it had no issues anyway

Apple abuses patents. The slide to unlock and related stuff are already so common and they still want to make a huge fuss over it. They are especially aggressive towards Samsung because Samsung is evolving to be a potentially serious rival. They must think of the consequences too. Well, many Apple products are all bits and bits from other companies formed together anyway.


----------



## shakirmoledina (Aug 25, 2012)

this is also really unfair. the way the calculations are done means that if apple would have sued them later on, they could have gotten even more.

that means that as if they were waiting for the right time to sue them so that they get "enough" dough

it should have been based on the patent and not the number of devices. law...


----------



## naved.islam14 (Aug 25, 2012)

I guess this proves that I can sue any one for looking like me or wearing similar clothes.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 25, 2012)

chris888222 said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > Satangel said:
> ...


Neither side is good but in this instance Samsung is by far the lesser of 2 evils actually in comparison Samsung looks like a hero for standing up to the evil crapple and their attempts to dominate the market with their overpriced rubbish products oh and their bribed legal team.

They're only aggressive towards Samsung because Samsung actually makes cheaper and better products than crapple is currently selling and is doing better than them in the smart phone market without the need to try and hype up a sub par product and relying on the same group of fanboys.


----------



## mameks (Aug 25, 2012)

apparently the jury was given a list of around 600 questions they had to answer, and it was thought that they wouldn't be done for something around 2 weeks.
they finished in 48 hours.
a jury of Americans from Silicon Valley in a case against a Korean company?
k then unbiased


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 25, 2012)

Apple = the only company who wants you to buy their products, even if it means systematically obliterating the competition by any means necessary.  Seriously, I hated that company before, but after hearing about the one-sided verdict, I have strong abhorrence towards them as a company.  Not only do they haunt every corner of the earth, but they're hellbent on making sure anyone who's anyone buys their products and no one else's.  Severely overpriced, overrated phones, computers and MP3 players that have the exact same features as everyone else? Oh, where can I get these marvelous devices?!


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Aug 25, 2012)

Steve Jobs corrupted Apple harsh. They used to be good. Honestly. But ever since they got into the phone market and the whole touch generation, they've quickly become the hernia in the ass.

I never cared for the guy anyways to be honest, ya he made good products, but he was still a dick who didn't care about the consumer, and now he's rubbing off onto Apple.


----------



## Gnargle (Aug 25, 2012)

I wonder if the creator of Unix will sue Apple over their use of it in OS X and iOS - he'd have about as much claim as Apple did here.
Oh, hang on. He can't. Because he died the same month as Jobs, but because he didn't care for fame and adoration, no-one in the wider world noticed.


----------



## nando (Aug 25, 2012)

Samsung deserved it and by the reads of these posts you guys never read the evidence against samsung. Samsung is absolute evil and while they may give you waht appears to be cheaper products they do it at the expense of others.  Apple spends a lot of money on design. Even the tiniest elements get consideration and designers and developers get payed well for such things. Samsung highers copy cats to rip off all this elements into their own products and "compete" according to you people. Where does that leave the creative people that work on all these? Why cant samsung higher an equaly creative team? Is it because they would have to charge as much as apple to cover their costs? How is that competition?

I always hated samsung long before their battles with apple. They are a crappy company and im glad tgey got hit. Patents in this case arent hindering progress. Samsung is. They didn't quite lose to patents. Apple showed strong evidence of overall brand dressing with all the things they copied. Just imagine if korea came up with a korean counter part to every musician the west has. Thats what samsung is.

The fact is that this site i simply full of apple haters and it is not based on true operations of the companies, it is only based on the final cost to you. Samsung could be running slave mines to build cheap components and you people would condemned others for being more expensive for not doing the same.  And thats just it. You guys just want cheap not matter who the real losers are.


----------



## Hero-Link (Aug 25, 2012)

nando said:


> Samsung deserved it and by the reads of these posts you guys never read the evidence against samsung. Samsung is absolute evil and while they may give you waht appears to be cheaper products they do it at the expense of others.  Apple spends a lot of money on design. Even the tiniest elements get consideration and designers and developers get payed well for such things. Samsung highers copy cats to rip off all this elements into their own products and "compete" according to you people. Where does that leave the creative people that work on all these? Why cant samsung higher an equaly creative team? Is it because they would have to charge as much as apple to cover their costs? How is that competition?
> 
> I always hated samsung long before their battles with apple. They are a crappy company and im glad tgey got hit. Patents in this case arent hindering progress. Samsung is. They didn't quite lose to patents. Apple showed strong evidence of overall brand dressing with all the things they copied. Just imagine if korea came up with a korean counter part to every musician the west has. Thats what samsung is.
> 
> The fact is that this site i simply full of apple haters and it is not based on true operations of the companies, it is only based on the final cost to you. Samsung could be running slave mines to build cheap components and you people would condemned others for being more expensive for not doing the same.  And thats just it. You guys just want cheap not matter who the real losers are.



I am sorry... your entire post reeks of Apple fanbo_ism_. Please go buy more Apple products in celebration and leave the sane people talk.


----------



## nando (Aug 25, 2012)

Will do.

But you have to admit that every article that makes apple look bad show up here in no time no matter how unimportant. Yet the samsung internal document surfaced weeks ago and no one here even mentioned it. You may call me a fanboy but i didnt make a thread about it. Yet if it was an apple internal document incriminitating apple you'd all be aover it like flies on shit. So call me an apple fanboy but you guys are at fox mews level when it comes to being biased. I read all the previous threads here about apple and i didnt even bother to reply because the fact is tgat you are more fanatic than i could ever be


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 25, 2012)

nando said:


> Samsung deserved it and by the reads of these posts you guys never read the evidence against samsung. Samsung is absolute evil and while they may give you waht appears to be cheaper products they do it at the expense of others.  Apple spends a lot of money on design. Even the tiniest elements get consideration and designers and developers get payed well for such things. Samsung highers copy cats to rip off all this elements into their own products and "compete" according to you people. Where does that leave the creative people that work on all these? Why cant samsung higher an equaly creative team? Is it because they would have to charge as much as apple to cover their costs? How is that competition?
> 
> I always hated samsung long before their battles with apple. They are a crappy company and im glad tgey got hit. Patents in this case arent hindering progress. Samsung is. They didn't quite lose to patents. Apple showed strong evidence of overall brand dressing with all the things they copied. Just imagine if korea came up with a korean counter part to every musician the west has. Thats what samsung is.
> 
> The fact is that this site i simply full of apple haters and it is not based on true operations of the companies, it is only based on the final cost to you. Samsung could be running slave mines to build cheap components and you people would condemned others for being more expensive for not doing the same.  And thats just it. You guys just want cheap not matter who the real losers are.


If you like overpriced sub par rubbish that is destroying the industry then your etitiled to your opinion even though its bullshit and its wrong. Crapple didn't actually invent anything don't believe me watch the 1st video below and yet they in their vain attempt to make money steal from others and then sue the people stole from just to rub it in. In the technology world crapple isn't a hero or an innovator they're noting more than the schoolyard bully who and when someone stands up to them instead of doing things better they rather kill the competition so they don't have to think of anything new or better a good example is their new and oh so "innovative" crapos5 which just stole features from Android and you don't see Google acting like a spoiled little brat.

Also for your attack on Korean music, let me just say that atleast they're more bloody creative then the mainstream shit the west call "music". Typical fanboys. Can't think of any real arguments so they resort to cheap racism instead that reminds me of a company that wants to ruin technology with their overprice sub par rubbish but I forgot its name...what was it...you know the one that Steve jobs guy was working at....I recall they made this thing called an icrap or something but i'm sure they love to restrict and force people to use a horrible program called...wow my memory is bad today what was it....oh yes it was tunerestriction or waste of hard-drive space, oh well I seem to remember they tried to make a shit phone that makes doing simple tasks extremely difficult, ah I remember this is apple I was talking about you know the american company the one that is trying to stop anyone from buying phones that actually work properly and easily without the need to navigate through menu after menu after menu to do simple tasks, see here


----------



## Gahars (Aug 26, 2012)

I'm sure there will be a lengthy appeals battle over this verdict, so the fat lady hasn't (Sam)sung yet.


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 26, 2012)

nando said:


> Samsung deserved it and by the reads of these posts you guys never read the evidence against samsung. Samsung is absolute evil and while they may give you waht appears to be cheaper products they do it at the expense of others.  Apple spends a lot of money on design. Even the tiniest elements get consideration and designers and developers get payed well for such things. Samsung highers copy cats to rip off all this elements into their own products and "compete" according to you people. Where does that leave the creative people that work on all these? Why cant samsung higher an equaly creative team? Is it because they would have to charge as much as apple to cover their costs? How is that competition?



I facepalmed so hard from reading this I now am suffering from a permanent concussion. Let me get this straight, by Apple suing Samsung (and other companies who get in their path of world domination) for infringing their "patents" (read: trolling), it makes it fair competition to other companies and any potential customers who wish to buy _*affordable*_ non-Apple phones? Sounds like unfair advantage to me, you know, like dynamite fishing.



nando said:


> I always hated samsung long before their battles with apple. They are a crappy company and im glad they got hit. Patents in this case aren't hindering progress. Samsung is. They didn't quite lose to patents. Apple showed strong evidence of overall brand dressing with all the things they copied. Just imagine if Korea came up with a Korean counter part to every musician the west has. Thats what samsung is.



Again, flawed logic; patents are only created to prevent anyone from being coming up with their own ideas.  They protect the company in question sure, but let's say Company A patents a GUI for an OS that's streamlined and uses a grid system for icons, it gets popular, and everyone grows to love it.  A few years pass and Company B designs a GUI for their own OS that shares similarities in how it looks, but isn't a blatant ripoff. Company A gets butthurt and starts bellyaching that Company B stole their ideas.  All hell breaks loose, Company A wins and potential customers end up getting limited choices in what OS they want in their phones.  Hmm, limited choices, you-have-to-this, you-have-to-use-that attitudes. Gee, where have I heard that before? I don't know, the USSR?  



nando said:


> The fact is that this site is simply full of apple haters and it is not based on true operations of the companies, it is only based on the final cost to you. Samsung could be running slave mines to build cheap components and you people would condemned others for being more expensive for not doing the same.  And thats just it. You guys just want cheap not matter who the real losers are.



O RLY?  The blatantly obvious Apple-worshiper arrogance is strong with this one.  I bet you anything you own a MacBook Pro and use it to play "games".

Well, too frikin' bad for you, I'm siding with Just Another Gamer on this one.


----------



## Shuji1987 (Aug 26, 2012)

Nando, if you honestly believe that Samsung is just a company that steals and repackages that cheaper then you are just an idiot. To prove my point just look at the design story behind the Galaxy SIII:


Sure I won't disagree that past iterations of TouchWiz had a lot of similarities with iOS, but that's just taking good ideas and improve upon. TouchWiz in it's current shape is nothing like iOS at all and becomes better and more intuitive to use with every new version. 

Don't forget that Samsung always delivers top-notch hardware which lasts years and which is far ahead of competition, while Apple releases outdated hardware which will feel laggy with the next iteration of iOS (S2 was more powerful than the 4S for example and I have no doubt that the S3 will be better than the iPhone 5 in terms of specs as well).

Also, isn't the iPhone 5 going to hop on the bandwagon which is called bigger screens (if we can believe the rumors that is)? Guess which company made that viable. Samsung promoted bigger screens and well, the public loves them. Every brand nowadays has huge screens although you can argue that LG goes a bit over board with their LG Vu (same idea as the Galaxy Note, but square instead of rectangular). 

Does this mean that Samsung is suing all of those companies? Will it sue Apple when it releases said phone? No, they won't (even though I want them too). Because atleast they acknowledge that competition only leads to more innovation and in the end benefits themselves and the customer for delivering better products.

I'm actually looking forward to their presentation in September where they will introduce the iPhone 5 and praise it's thin design, bigger screen, 5x5 icons and most noteably dated hardware that is way too overpriced as the new holy grail which they invented.


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 26, 2012)

if people think Apple reinvented the wheel, they're wrong, they stole it straight from the axle of the person who did.


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 26, 2012)

Many of you are showing pure android fanboyism and don't even know it/are doing it on purpose.

Apple didn't exactly invent everything (that's true) but most of the things I read are just impactful bashing and bashing.

Mods please lock this thread.



Spoiler



although it is true that ever since the Cook days Apple has been going down like fk


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 26, 2012)

People can bash political parties back and forth, but we're not allowed to do so with companies? Wow.


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 26, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> People can bash political parties back and forth, but we're not allowed to do so with companies? Wow.


Okay I agree. You aren't bashing a particular person/temper, but what else can you talk about in this thread other than a rage war between Apple VS Samsung?


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Aug 26, 2012)

chris888222 said:


> Many of you are showing pure android fanboyism and don't even know it/are doing it on purpose.
> 
> Apple didn't exactly invent everything (that's true) but most of the things I read are just impactful bashing and bashing.
> 
> ...



No, the thread will stay open. Discussion has been civil this far. Well, at least more civil than your average Apple vs. The World thread.


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 26, 2012)

TwinRetro said:


> chris888222 said:
> 
> 
> > Many of you are showing pure android fanboyism and don't even know it/are doing it on purpose.
> ...


To be honest, I'm starting to get sick of Apple products. If the iPhone 5 doesn't seem like a blockbuster (A5X chip sucks IMO), then fuck that. 

I'll never go for Samsung though. I had horrible experiences with them before. Apple served me well in customer service, but their phones/software get really boring after some time.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 26, 2012)

chris888222 said:


> Many of you are showing pure android fanboyism and don't even know it/are doing it on purpose.
> 
> Apple didn't exactly invent everything (that's true) but most of the things I read are just impactful bashing and bashing.
> 
> ...


So its suddenly wrong to bash the company that is ruining the smartphone market?

Like I said earlier crapple is nothing more than the school yard bully who wants to have his way and the fanboys are like the children who only follow him around because they're scared or don't know any better.




TwinRetro said:


> No, the thread will stay open. Discussion has been civil this far. Well, at least more civil than your average Apple vs. The World thread.


Thanks for understanding?


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Aug 26, 2012)

boo patents.

Patents both create a system that protects intellectual property and encourages the development of new ideas but also creates one that discourages competition.

It's a double edged sword. Personally though I would enjoy seeing a cell phone manufacturer to try stepping outside the box a little. A lot of phones nowadays are really similar. We'll never know what the next great cell phone design could be if all our phones are just rounded rectangles with touchscreens and tiled OS layouts.


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 26, 2012)

chris888222 said:


> the_randomizer said:
> 
> 
> > People can bash political parties back and forth, but we're not allowed to do so with companies? Wow.
> ...



Not else much to be honest, kinda hard to be civil when others aren't; Samsung I side with, Apple I detest because of their business practices (see: overpriced), their stance on using proprietary hardware, such as adapters that cost an arm and a leg (such as lack of true HDMI adapters on MacBook pros, etc). That's why I said what I said to nando, he was bashing Samsung, so I in turn, did the same to Apple, to which he or she seems to have a strong affinity towards.  If someone can tell me one thing Apple can do that others can't, maybe I'll agree, but until then....


----------



## iFish (Aug 26, 2012)

From what I've seen from this site, anytime Apple is mentioned, the shit hits the fan. That's not a good aspect for a community. "Let's never be civil and only shoot hate towards Apple and be angry all the time" That's not a good community. 

Seeing "Just get an Android" in the iOS section just further proves my point. 

It's childish, really.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 26, 2012)

iFish said:


> From what I've seen from this site, anytime Apple is mentioned, the shit hits the fan. That's not a good aspect for a community. "Let's never be civil and only shoot hate towards Apple and be angry all the time" That's not a good community.
> 
> Seeing "Just get an Android" in the iOS section just further proves my point.
> 
> It's childish, really.


But we're joining forces and doing the hating together and thats the meaning of community.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Aug 26, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> But we're joining forces and doing the hating together and thats the meaning of community.



Or a massive hoard of retards but that's the same thing I think.


----------



## iFish (Aug 26, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> iFish said:
> 
> 
> > From what I've seen from this site, anytime Apple is mentioned, the shit hits the fan. That's not a good aspect for a community. "Let's never be civil and only shoot hate towards Apple and be angry all the time" That's not a good community.
> ...


A community in my opinion is a group of people who can have a civil goddamn discussion. People like you ruin a community


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 26, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > But we're joining forces and doing the hating together and thats the meaning of community.
> ...


Only YOU would reply to me like that. Seriously disagree by all means but go and troll someone else.


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 26, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> So its suddenly wrong to bash the company that is ruining the smartphone market?
> 
> Like I said earlier crapple is nothing more than the school yard bully who wants to have his way and the fanboys are like the children who only follow him around because they're scared or don't know any better.



If anything, I believe the bashing to be more than justified.  By Apple bullying other companies for "stealing" their ideas because of troll-infected patents, competition goes down the crapper, and potential customers are severely limited as a result; the have no choice but to purchase sub-par products.  $1,000,000,000 is an awful lot to sue a company over for something Apple bitches about all day long, but whatever. Apple fell so far from the tree, it landed on the road only to have a truck crush it to bits.


----------



## KingVamp (Aug 26, 2012)

But a civil advice could simply be  " just get a android".  

Idk. I'll just say that some things shouldn't be patentable.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Aug 26, 2012)

Man...reading through this thread made me face floor. Twice.

I'll admit I'm an Android fanboy, cuz really Android is pretty sweet, but it's clear Samsung took *inspiration* from Apple's designs. Is it a bad thing? Not in the least bit. Apple should have given Samsung a pat on the back and a thank you for the compliment. Did Apple need to cry about it and sue Samsung for it? God no. Apple is being childish and needs to deal with the fact that they can't own the market. I hope Samsung gets the appeal.

Though I wonder if Apple haters will go out and buy a bunch of Samsung products so they can "Stick it to Crapple  "


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 26, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > So its suddenly wrong to bash the company that is ruining the smartphone market?
> ...


I hope Apple knows that it's not Samsung they are dealing against...

Even if they successfully stripped Samsung out of the mobile industry.

I'm quite concerned over the new Samsung store at Sydney though.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Aug 26, 2012)

iFish said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > iFish said:
> ...


A) It's been very very very many years since this site has been able to have a civil discussion about anything. There's always someone, whether new or old, who will come in and fuck everything up.

B) A lot of us hate Apple, there's nothing wrong with that. And for those of you who do have a problem with it should only see it as us voicing our opinions.

C) You derailing this thread bashing the community doesn't help any either. A lot of us hate Apple just like a lot of us hate R4 clones that are crap.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 26, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > So its suddenly wrong to bash the company that is ruining the smartphone market?
> ...


Lol so true and I love the ending analogy so meaningful but its unfortunate how alot of bigger companies resort to this when faced with the competition they currently can't beat. I mean if crapple spent the time and money not on sueing Samsung worldwide and actually innovated then they might atleast get more sales.


----------



## Black-Ice (Aug 26, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> Lol so true and I love the ending analogy so meaningful but its unfortunate how alot of bigger companies resort to this when faced with the competition they currently can't beat. I mean if crapple spent the time and money not on sueing Samsung worldwide and actually innovated then they might atleast get more sales.


Big business is a game. And big businesses are noob players
If they can't win, they lower the difficulty in any way possible. To once again achieve their hollow victory


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Aug 26, 2012)

Black-Ice said:


> Big business is a game. And big businesses are noob players
> If they can't win, they lower the difficulty in any way possible. To once again achieve their hollow victory



If big business is a game and big businesses are players, doesn't that make them more like developers?


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 26, 2012)

That reminds me...

Remember the rumors that the next chip on the iPhone 5 is based on Exynos Quad?
Who designed the Exynos Quad?
Who built the A5X chip? 

/childish


----------



## Black-Ice (Aug 26, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Black-Ice said:
> 
> 
> > Big business is a game. And big businesses are noob players
> ...


If I bring up developers copying things someone will say Sony, someone will say Nintendo. Soulx will appear and you two will fight.
So i'd rather not.


----------



## stanleyopar2000 (Aug 26, 2012)

this is bullshit and they know it, someone's pockets got filled with a brand new iBribe


Steve Jobs lives. and he is using all the money in apples bank to  "destroy android"


why can't hackivists fuck them over?? 

*This is a sad day for the "free market" and will cause "higher prices" in the future  - *_Samsung's response to Apple Ruling_

EA even predicts that Apple will fall. And you know what. I hope they are right. but there will always be people who will support this regime of market communists just because they think they will be cooler if they own one of their products. -no thought into purchase-

and when Apples Mini iPad comes out....they will be riding the tablet markets ass...saying all the technology that Samsung, Asus, Acer and motorola are using is _theirs_

In Apples perfect world. There is no competition. and with lawsuits with almost every Android manufacturer,(except LG, who gives a fuck about them) HTC, Samsung, Google and Motorola_....they are perverting the ways of justice to make their dream of destroying android a reality_


----------



## iFish (Aug 26, 2012)

chris888222 said:


> That reminds me...
> 
> Remember the rumors that the next chip on the iPhone 5 is based on Exynos Quad?
> Who designed the Exynos Quad?
> ...


Building it means nothing in terms of the processors. I mean, Apple designed the AX chips. They're not a manufacture, Apple can't build their own CPUs. They can design the CPUs, not make them. That's like saying "Foxconn makes Apple products, so they're not Apple products anymore" 
Apple pays samsung to mass produce these chips. 

Also, I've yet to see rumours about it being a Exynos-based chip.


----------



## stanleyopar2000 (Aug 26, 2012)

how can Samsung be so STUPID to want to keep making chips for these low life bastards!?

I just saw that Samsung renewed an agreement to create chips for  CrApple on the iClone 5....


----------



## iFish (Aug 26, 2012)

stanleyopar2000 said:


> how can Samsung be so STUPID to want to keep making chips for these low life bastards!?
> 
> I just saw that Samsung renewed an agreement to create chips for Apple the iPhone 5....


They legally can't deny business or refuse money.


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 26, 2012)

iFish said:


> chris888222 said:
> 
> 
> > That reminds me...
> ...


I thought Samsung can choose to reject helping them to mass produce?

Also: http://www.mobilemag.com/2012/07/06/iphone-5-getting-samsung-exynos-based-quad-core-a6-processor/

A5X is most likely, but what is the use of quad core GPU on a mobile if your CPU is dual core?
It justifies on the new iPad but not on a rumored 4" device.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Aug 26, 2012)

iFish said:


> stanleyopar2000 said:
> 
> 
> > how can Samsung be so STUPID to want to keep making chips for these low life bastards!?
> ...



Depends on the contract. If the contract is set for x Years, then they can't until the years have passed. Or if it's just a simple "make this we'll pay you this", then yeah, Samsung can do whatever the fuck they want.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Aug 26, 2012)

stanleyopar2000 said:


> how can Samsung be so STUPID to want to keep making chips for these low life bastards!?
> 
> I just saw that Samsung renewed an agreement to create chips for  CrApple on the iClone 5....


Ummm....doesn't Samsung reserve the better chips and parts for their own phones?


----------



## adamshinoda (Aug 26, 2012)

Samsung Ace for 0$... ha, that's my phone 

Is that Ernst Stavro Blofeld in that picture?


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 26, 2012)

Just Another Gamer said:


> stanleyopar2000 said:
> 
> 
> > how can Samsung be so STUPID to want to keep making chips for these low life bastards!?
> ...


Actually no. Apple designs their own chips and Samsung just manufactures it like how Apple designs it.


----------



## iFish (Aug 26, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> iFish said:
> 
> 
> > stanleyopar2000 said:
> ...


I don't think so. I could be wrong, though. But even if I am wrong, the business / money Apple provides Samsung for the parts gives Samsung so much money I don't think they can afford(or be as well off as they currently re) to do it. I'm not really sure the exact amount that Apple pays Samsung, but it has to be a hefty amount.


----------



## stanleyopar2000 (Aug 26, 2012)

iFish said:


> stanleyopar2000 said:
> 
> 
> > how can Samsung be so STUPID to want to keep making chips for these low life bastards!?
> ...



I would refuse to work for them just for the fact of moral fiber...but...that's me...they probably don't care if Apple just buttfucked a billion butthurt dollars out of them.


----------



## triassic911 (Aug 26, 2012)

stanleyopar2000 said:


> how can Samsung be so STUPID to want to keep making chips for these low life bastards!?
> 
> I just saw that Samsung renewed an agreement to create chips for  CrApple on the iClone 5....


Well that is a separate issue, because it is business.


----------



## chris888222 (Aug 26, 2012)

stanleyopar2000 said:


> iFish said:
> 
> 
> > stanleyopar2000 said:
> ...


According to wiki, It's worth $8.8 billion.

And that is Samsung's investment.

Apple must have paid them A LOT more.


----------



## Livin in a box (Aug 26, 2012)

There's an awful lot of people here completely slating Apple - some of which I agree with - but one has to remember that Samsung _have _used Apple's patents, there's no 2 ways about it. Whether or not Apple should have been awarded some of these patents, like the rounded edges one, is certainly a matter of debate but you can't say that Samsung was actually going to _win_ against Apple in court.

Also, remember, this is a South Korean company going up against an American company in America with an American judge and an American jury, so who was really going to win all along? The fact that the jury had awarded Apple compensation for devices that didn't actually infringe on any of Apple's patents just shows what direction they were headed in from the start.


----------



## stanleyopar2000 (Aug 26, 2012)

Livin in a box said:


> There's an awful lot of people here completely slating Apple - some of which I agree with - but one has to remember that Samsung _have _used Apple's patents, there's no 2 ways about it. Whether or not Apple should have been awarded some of these patents, like the rounded edges one, is certainly a matter of debate but you can't say that Samsung was actually going to _win_ against Apple in court.
> 
> Also, remember, this is a South Korean company going up against an American company in America with an American judge and an American jury, so who was really going to win all along? The fact that the jury had awarded Apple compensation for devices that didn't actually infringe on any of Apple's patents just shows what direction they were headed in from the start.




and a California Judge, in a California Court, with Apples HQ in California...you can't spell conflict of interest or favoritism anymore than that.


*UPDATE* - Samsung is not happy with the ruling...and their lawyers think that they can get some overturned and will plan to Appeal...go get em Sammy.


----------



## Wizerzak (Aug 26, 2012)

iFish said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > iFish said:
> ...


And like Apple thought up those ideas in the first place. Nearly every single 'innovation' by Apple (such as bounce back scroll, voice control, grid style etc.) has usually been done years before by another company (and ALWAYS previously done on PCs through either default OS settings or the community). The only reason Apple seems to be able to patent these ideas is because:

1) They have such a large fanbase that will rave over any idea that Apple shits out good or not. (You know how people see Microsoft / Windows as nerdy (mainly due to the Mac ads)? No one ever commented on how nerdy Steve Jobs looked up on stage with his jumper tucked into his jeans.)
2) It is so good at 'advertising' (or manipulating people into thinking that this was their idea and that it is the latest thing (see point 1))

Basically, Apple could release Microsoft Bob under a different name / skin and all of a sudden the whole world will love it, and any phone without it (or something similar) will instantly fail and be called crap for not including it. (I think you may be able to see where this is going).
Thus many other companies are forced into including similar features in order to stay in the market. Fine, Apple can carry on 'innovating' (reusing old ideas) and stay ahead of the rest.

But this is where it goes wrong. Apple, instead of focusing on simply providing the feature better than anyone else, or moving onto another stolen idea, will instead patent 'their idea' and sue the competition. This has allowed them to dominate the market and stay on top of the opposition. And if things carry on this way without anyone putting a stop to it, Apple could soon have control of the entire market, something nobody (bar Apple themselves) wants to happen.


----------



## stanleyopar2000 (Aug 26, 2012)

Wizerzak said:


> iFish said:
> 
> 
> > Just Another Gamer said:
> ...



+1 QFT. This. This 100x

Apple wants no other smartphone on the market but theirs.

Apple knows they are failing with better smartphones that can do more. So instead of re-innovating themselves to try to keep an edge on the Android market. They will just get rid of Android. That way they will have nobody to compete with. So then they won't need to innovate. Then no one will have a choice. Totally childish and immature, and butthurt. But. I Think I said that already.
This is not promoting healthy competition at all. And if something isn't done. There could be a monopoly.

Apple 2012  - Think Different *Litigate. *

PS: oh my god. Bob. But at least half of the characters had a future as those fucking annoying office assistants 







Even the fucking CD looks cheeky. And has a strange resemblance to the past CEO of Microsoft........


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Aug 27, 2012)

All this hate against Apple is just because they're dominating the smartphone/tablet industry right now. It's the same with Nintendo. Before when Apple wasn't making very much money (and Nintendo with the N64/Gamecube), everyone loved them but now that they're winning, they're *evil* all of a sudden.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Aug 27, 2012)

soulx said:


> All this hate against Apple is just because they're dominating the smartphone/tablet industry right now. It's the same with Nintendo. Before when Apple wasn't making very much money (and Nintendo with the N64/Gamecube), everyone loved them but now that they're winning, they're *evil* all of a sudden.



The hate isn't because they are dominating...the hate is towards lawsuits and patents like these that will make sure Apple will dominate for years to come, pretty much unchallenged. I wouldn't call it evil, but I would call it exploiting a broken system.

For the record, I never liked Apple. Well, I wouldn't say never. The Apple II was one of my favorite gaming platforms when I was in school.


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 27, 2012)

TwinRetro said:


> soulx said:
> 
> 
> > All this hate against Apple is just because they're dominating the smartphone/tablet industry right now. It's the same with Nintendo. Before when Apple wasn't making very much money (and Nintendo with the N64/Gamecube), everyone loved them but now that they're winning, they're *evil* all of a sudden.
> ...



Exploiting? I'd call it downright *raping* the whole legal system.  Sorry for the strong word, but I can't think of any other fitting verbs. Dominating a certain market in and of itself isn't inherently evil, but taking the legal system and slaughter your enemies is...Can we say monopolizing much?


----------



## Rydian (Aug 27, 2012)

soulx said:


> All this hate against Apple is just because they're dominating the smartphone/tablet industry right now. It's the same with Nintendo. Before when Apple wasn't making very much money (and Nintendo with the N64/Gamecube), everyone loved them but now that they're winning, they're *evil* all of a sudden.


Where the hell you been?  People have been hating Apple's business tactics and marketing for years.  Their "Mac versus PC" commercials didn't just start a year ago, I'll tell you that much.  They started in 2006.  That's six freaking years ago that Apple started the kind of tactics that piss people (like you see posting) off.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Aug 27, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> > soulx said:
> ...


How is it _raping_ the legal system if Samsung has clearly copied parts of their OS. Sure there are some allegations that I don't stand by (tablets having similar design) but for the most part, it's Samsung that was at fault.


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 27, 2012)

soulx said:


> How is it _raping_ the legal system if Samsung has clearly copied parts of their OS. Sure there are some allegations that I don't stand by (tablets having similar design) but for the most part, it's Samsung that was at fault.



See: Post #158 above


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Aug 27, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> soulx said:
> 
> 
> > How is it _raping_ the legal system if Samsung has clearly copied parts of their OS. Sure there are some allegations that I don't stand by (tablets having similar design) but for the most part, it's Samsung that was at fault.
> ...


Doesn't explain how they're raping the legal system with this case.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Aug 27, 2012)

soulx said:


> All this hate against Apple is just because they're dominating the smartphone/tablet industry right now. It's the same with Nintendo. Before when Apple wasn't making very much money (and Nintendo with the N64/Gamecube), everyone loved them but now that they're winning, they're *evil* all of a sudden.



Honestly, I can't speak for everyone but for me:

A) I hate Apple because of how little control the user has over the phone, and the fact that you have to do everything Apple's way, where as Android is very open, and you get a just as good if not better phone for cheaper or the same price. That and how money hungry they are by setting up lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit and actually winning over stupid reasons.

B) The only time I hated Nintendo was how little they cared about the Wii and how lackluster, even the first party titles, were. And the amount of shovelware they allowed on that thing. It was bad. But even if I did hate Nintendo, it's hard for me to considering the amount of years of gaming enjoyment they've given me compared to the other companies. Apple has done no such thing to make me not hate them.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Aug 27, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Honestly, I can't speak for everyone but for me:
> 
> A) I hate Apple because of how little control the user has over the phone, and the fact that you have to do everything Apple's way, where as Android is very open, and you get a just as good if not better phone for cheaper or the same price. That and how money hungry they are by setting up lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit and actually winning over stupid reasons.
> 
> B) The only time I hated Nintendo was how little they cared about the Wii and how lackluster, even the first party titles, were. And the amount of shovelware they allowed on that thing. It was bad. But even if I did hate Nintendo, it's hard for me to considering the amount of years of gaming enjoyment they've given me compared to the other companies. Apple has done no such thing to make me not hate them.


A) The iPhone/iPad being closed platforms with only one device model at a time isn't a _flaw_. It allows them to create a more polished OS specifically tailored for their hardware as well as prevent platform fragmentation. As you can see with Android, unless you have a powerful device (like the Transformers Prime), it's likely to lag and stutter sometimes (which Google is trying to alleviate with Project Butter). That's due to code that isn't optimized for the hardware.

B) Personally with Nintendo, I think their first-party output this gen was more than stellar. We got Super Mario Galaxy 1/2, DCKR: Returns, NSMB: Wii, Metroid Prime: 3, Skyward Sword, Xenoblade Chronicles and more. Shovelware isn't Nintendo's fault, it's the result of a successful platform. The PS2 had tons of shovelware, the DS had a lot and now the Wii. Nintendo can't just prevent developers from making legitimate games (even if you think they're crap) for their platform. That would introduce heaps of problems.


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 27, 2012)

soulx said:


> Doesn't explain how they're raping the legal system with this case.



1 - They create patents, 
2 - They _*conveniently*_ wait a few years for companies to "copy" their designs, OS features, etc.
3 - They wait competitors' phones/devices to get popular
4 - Strike them down with battle ax full of lawsuits
5 - Sue them for exorbitant amounts of money
6 - Limit other companies' options by forcing potential customers to buy Apple's products and no one else's
7 - Read post #154, where *stanleyopar2000 *stated that Apple and the trial took place in California, which incited favoritism towards Apple, Why? Its HQ is in, *gasp* California!

If they're going to sue others for infringement, do it right away and not wait a millennium for said copied idea to get popular. 
Those Apple-worshiping jackholes can sod off.


----------



## Black-Ice (Aug 27, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> do it right away and not wait a millennium for said copied idea to get popular.


Wait for it to be worth more, so they can get more.
Seems like a legit business decision, not a very honourable one. But money > honour


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 27, 2012)

Black-Ice said:


> Wait for it to be worth more, so they can get more.
> Seems like a legit business decision, not a very honourable one. But money > honour



Sad, but true. Greedy companies will be greedy.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Aug 27, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> soulx said:
> 
> 
> > Doesn't explain how they're raping the legal system with this case.
> ...


1. _*Shiiit*_, every company does.
2. Example?
3. ^
4. ^
5. ^
6. How do they force customers to buy Apple products? That's one of the most daft things I have heard.
7. In South Korea, a court ruled that Samsung did not copy the US company Apple. It goes both ways.]

A couple years is a millennium (iOS/iPhone/iPad release date (2007/2010) to the release of these devices/OS) ?


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 27, 2012)

Ever heard of Anascape? They sued Nintendo for infringing their patent on the Wiimote two years after the Wii was released. There's your f***ing example, Apple-lover.

My using the word millennium is called hyperbole.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Aug 27, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> Ever heard of Anascape? They sued Nintendo for infringing their patent on the Wiimote two years after the Wii was released. There's your f***ing example, Apple-lover.
> 
> My using the word millennium is called hyperbole.


That's a shit example. I'm talking about Apple, not some random company. Comparing a patent troll to this case is silly.


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 27, 2012)

Well, you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine.  Can't we at least agree that Apple overcharges its products when you can get something just as good, if not better from another company?  Like MacBooks for example?  I bought a laptop with better specs for half the price. I don't understand the whole mentality behind Apple's customer base, and why people praise it like some deity.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Aug 28, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> Well, you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine.


Isn't that a good thing to say when you realize your argument is completely baseless?


----------



## gamefan5 (Aug 28, 2012)

soulx said:


> the_randomizer said:
> 
> 
> > Well, you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine.
> ...


Pure ownage... that's all I'm saying. XD

On-topic: I don't hate Apple. I do own an Ipod, but I'm rather neutral. Although I am aware that their business tactics have generate some controversy.


----------



## the_randomizer (Aug 28, 2012)

.................Not dignifying that with a response.


----------



## Necron (Aug 28, 2012)

I read Samsung is going to pay the 1 billion in 5 cents coins... is this for real? I can't find any source in English.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Aug 28, 2012)

More respect lost. I see no point to these lawsuits.. The suits over at Apple aren't exactly clean... A lot of the features the iPhone has came from the Android base. Notification center? Oddly familiar.. Sure, they're generally the first to hand out millions of dollars to buy the patent... Not their idea... Thus not innovation... 

It's funny though.. A lot of Apples fan base are pretty pissed at this. I mean.. They only targeted Samsung, their major rival for the past couple of years. Yet, there are blatant Chinese knock offs floating around that you can buy that look EXACTLY like the iPhone. But nope... They went after the one who would give the most money, for what looks like false infringement. Bravo, apple.. Your idiocy once again has reached a new low.


----------



## Jamstruth (Aug 28, 2012)

There are bullshit patents both sides of this case. I mean Samsung has a patent for e-mail on a mobile device with a camera! HOW THE?! WHY DID THAT GET GRANTED?!


I have no idea whether the amount of money is fair or not as I am no Judge. I do think Samsung were copying Apple's UI style a good bit though. Which is just incredibly stupid.


----------



## nando (Aug 28, 2012)

Mchief298 said:


> They went after the one who would give the most money, for what looks like false infringement. Bravo, apple.. Your idiocy once again has reached a new low.




you haven't seen the documents used as evidence have you?


----------



## Joe88 (Sep 1, 2012)

http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/30/samsung-patentlawsuit-planned-lte-iphone-targeted/

samsung has announced it will sue apple if they announce/release a new iphone that uses LTE
it could very well slow/ban the release of the iphone 5 if it goes through


----------



## CrimzonEyed (Sep 1, 2012)

EDIT: Companies are getting more childish for every second.


----------



## triassic911 (Sep 1, 2012)

Joe88 said:


> http://www.bgr.com/2...phone-targeted/
> 
> samsung has announced it will sue apple if they announce/release a new iphone that uses LTE
> it could very well slow/ban the release of the iphone 5 if it goes through


I see that none of them want to be "the better man" in this quarrel.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 1, 2012)

triassic911 said:


> Joe88 said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.bgr.com/2...phone-targeted/
> ...


Corporations sir. That is all.


----------



## funem (Sep 6, 2012)

iFish said:


> Just Another Gamer said:
> 
> 
> > iFish said:
> ...



Voice control on a mobile phone was first built in on an Android phone in 2010 on Froyo, It didnt apear on an Apple phone until the 4S in 2011, so Apple were not the first ones there either. Samsung just went with the flow on what was already on Android. Neither Android or Apple created it, as its been around for years.

Next Apple "innervation" to be shot down please....


----------



## Foxi4 (Sep 6, 2012)

funem said:


> Voice control on a mobile phone was first built in on an Android phone in 2010 on Froyo, It didnt apear on an Apple phone until the 4S in 2011, so Apple were not the first ones there either. Samsung just went with the flow on what was already on Android. Neither Android or Apple created it, as its been around for years.
> 
> Next Apple "innervation" to be shot down please....


Don't wanna burst your bubble, but... Microsoft, 2003, Windows Mobile (CE-Based), Microsoft Voice Command.

http://en.wikipedia....t_Voice_Command

Microsoft Voice Command 1.6 in action:
[yt]FFcqwKrxtO8[/yt]


----------



## Cartmanuk (Sep 6, 2012)

Greedy the lot of them Apple is going to do itself out of some business.


----------



## funem (Sep 6, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> funem said:
> 
> 
> > Voice control on a mobile phone was first built in on an Android phone in 2010 on Froyo, It didnt apear on an Apple phone until the 4S in 2011, so Apple were not the first ones there either. Samsung just went with the flow on what was already on Android. Neither Android or Apple created it, as its been around for years.
> ...



I said it was around before both Android and Apple, I was replying to the post that said Samsung copied Apple, I said voice control was first buit in on an Android phone in Froyo, then compared it to its first showing on an Apple phone a year later, I didnt say voice control was a first for Android period. I then re-itterated this by saying "Neither Android or Apple created it, as its been around for years".

My bubble remain un-burst


----------



## BORTZ (Sep 6, 2012)

I dont even have words. I have an iPhone but i feel strangely outside of this.


----------



## Foxi4 (Sep 6, 2012)

funem said:


> My bubble remain un-burst


But you said...


> Voice control on a mobile phone was first built in on an Android phone in 2010 on Froyo (...)


Not that it matters though, you're right, voice control has been around for years indeed.


----------



## funem (Sep 6, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> funem said:
> 
> 
> > My bubble remain un-burst
> ...



I think its in the way that you are reading it........


----------



## Foxi4 (Sep 6, 2012)

funem said:


> I think its in the way that you are reading it........


IRRELEVANT! 

In any case, your point and my point is pretty much the same - Apple gets attributed with many inventions they didn't actually invent. Tablets didn't start with the iPad - they started with Tablet PC's. Smartphones didn't start with iOS, they started with WinCE, Symbian, Palm OS etc. The general look of the iPhone wasn't exactly pulled out of a magician's hat - a central-placed joystick has been a theme in mobile devices for years. In the words of the late Steve Jobs, _"Good Artists copy, Great Artists steal"_, which is what Apple has been doing throughout the years successfuly. All of a sudden they feel like pointing fingers at people when they themselves take existing ideas and simply add their own flair to them.


----------



## funem (Sep 6, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> funem said:
> 
> 
> > I think its in the way that you are reading it........
> ...



Read the quotes under this news article, they were some of the best ever on the subject...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57409917-37/steve-jobs-really-was-mad-about-android-says-biographer/


----------



## Foxi4 (Sep 6, 2012)

funem said:


> Read the quotes under this news article, they were some of the best ever on the subject...
> 
> http://news.cnet.com...ays-biographer/


Looks like a fun little article there, I'm sure I'll enjoy it.

As for the headline - d'uh, of course he was "Angry at Android" - it's pretty much the only thing that has the capacity to rival iOS nowadays.


----------



## iFish (Sep 7, 2012)

funem said:


> iFish said:
> 
> 
> > Just Another Gamer said:
> ...


But Siri isn't voice control(at least not fully). It's more like, just searching and understanding human dialect. You can't really say "Siri open [application]"
The built-in(to my knowledge) voice control to Android wasn't the same thing. If we're going to say which phone was first, I remember my dad's old BlackBerry had it, too.


----------



## funem (Sep 7, 2012)

iFish said:


> funem said:
> 
> 
> > iFish said:
> ...



Voice control on mobiles has been around for years, before Android or Apple, I was just replying to the post which compared Samsungs version to Apples, inferring Samsung copied Apple.


----------

