Galaxy S3 vs. Iphone

[MLU]

Originally Posted by Charlie Brizzown

I just read through the first few posts in this thread. It's quite amusing how iPhone haters take jabs at the uppity iPhone owners using snooty remarks.

Another funny thing I've noticed. Android users love the bigger screens on their phones compared to the iPhone and then love the smaller screens on their tablets versus the iPad. Personally, I think their preference is ***-backwards but like most iPhone users, I don't give a crap what the next guy uses.

That's not like most iPhone users. Most iPhone users want to know why everyone doesn't have an iPhone. They also want to know if I heard if the next iPhone is going to have a bigger screen like my phone.

[bigdaddysaints]

Originally Posted by MLU

That's not like most iPhone users. Most iPhone users want to know why everyone doesn't have an iPhone. They also want to know if I heard if the next iPhone is going to have a bigger screen like my phone.

and if its gonna have 4G...

[50_Saint]

Oh guys your killing me today...Going to suck when the next Gen iPhone will have all of the above. I'm pretty sure you'll find something else to complain about.

[Claw]

Originally Posted by 50_Saint

Oh guys your killing me today...Going to suck when the next Gen iPhone will have all of the above. I'm pretty sure you'll find something else to complain about.

You mean the stuff we've been enjoying for 2 years? Or the glorified app launcher that people like to call an OS?

[nhuloan]

Apple motto should be "Litigate not Innovate"

[The Mongoose]

Originally Posted by nhuloan

Apple motto should be "Litigate not Innovate"

[The Mongoose]

also

[The Mongoose]

Originally Posted by Claw

I completely see your side of the argument, and have always respected your opinion. If the patents were all very cut & dry, I'd side with you with your lawsuit being good argument in a heartbeat. But you gotta admit that some of the IP that Apple is claiming is completely vague to say the least. I've personally read up a great deal on the specific patents in question concerning the ban on the Galaxy Tab and the pending ban on the Nexus, and they are a load of crap to say the least, IMO. Obviously the judge and I have differentiating opinions, but both the legal process which was used and the vagueness of the respective IP(s) are being questioned. Fortunately for Apple, they finally found a US judge that in doubt in mind owns and iphone and an ipad. I'd also be willing to bet a decent sum of money the injunction gets thrown out fairly quickly in Appeals court.

Back to what you said about Apple pretty much inventing these 'cool' things we have today, specifically talking about smart phones, there is absolutely no denying that. The problem lies in the fact that Apple is in essence trying to patent any and everything relating to a touch screen phone, since they were the first to create such a device. Yes, the initial concept was their idea. But it is up for debate whether or not they are the only ones that can produce phones like that now. Take Ford for example. If Apple was in their shoes early on, based on what they are trying to do now, they would have patents ranging from a gas engine providing the power all the way through the use of circular tires that enable the thing to move, to the use of glass windows on it which enable the occupants to see outside from within. This would have made any competition happening almost an afterthought, which no one in their right mind would think would've been a good idea looking back at it now. We would in no doubt be 30 - 50 years behind in innovation had that happened, meaning if Ford was the end all be all with vehicles. This is exactly what Apple is trying to do now.

Also in regards to that same argument, think of the innovations that Google has already made on top of Apple's initial concept, the first iPhone. Google was the first to use the notifications the iOS enjoys today, they were the first to use 'folders' on the home screens, the first to use any kind of voice dictation and commands on these new devices, video chat on the phones (gtalk) witch eventually turned into Facetime for Apple, and so on and so on. So in these specific instances, Google indisputably was the first to create these features, which Apple obviously felt was innovative and useful enough to implement them into their own phones. There is nothing wrong with that, it is simply a case of competition feeding innovation in its purest form. If Apple had their way from the beginning and Android never even made it off the drawing board, there is a very good possibility that these features would still not exist in iOS. The customers would then not demand something that they never seen, thus there would be little incentive for Apple to continue to go above and beyond by dumping more and more money in R&D, because the market would be already theirs with no serious threats around. This would single handily cripple innovation as for as phones are concerned. I just can not see how anyone could honestly deny this.

I give Apple a break in being trigger happy, given their history. They bought the GUI stuff they saw at Xerox Parc, improved it and developed it. They showed it to Microsoft so that MS could write some programs for them, and Microsoft totally ripped them off and stole the GUI tech. Apple almost went out of business. (Obviously it's more complicated than that, but they got punked, badly, by Bill Gates).

So years later, Steve Jobs develops technology to actually make smart phones a cool, true internet-in-your-pocket device. Through tablets, they can redefine the entire PC market and oust MS and the dominance they achieved long ago. They can usurp their punker and rise to the top.

Is it any surprise that that guy is going to be extremely careful about protecting his innovations?

If someone applies for a BS patent, it's on the patent office and patent law to sort that out, imo.

Then again, I am unabashedly an apple fan boy. I hated them for years, and I understand why people react negatively to their style and culture. But I got sucked in, and I'm loving every minute of it.

At the very least, it makes me feel superior to WDF, which is nice.

[bsmooth25]

25% of iPhones core components are made by Samsung. $11 billion paid to Samsung this year to keep the iPhone going. There is no iPhone without Samsung.

And as far as the shape of the phones and it's accessories...there can only be so many geometric shapes you can use. Apple didn't invent the headphones, but they sure took liberty in using a shape that already works...just sayin...

[The Mongoose]

Originally Posted by bsmooth25

25% of iPhones core components are made by Samsung. $11 billion paid to Samsung this year to keep the iPhone going. There is no iPhone without Samsung.

And as far as the shape of the phones and it's accessories...there can only be so many geometric shapes you can use. Apple didn't invent the headphones, but they sure took liberty in using a shape that already works...just sayin...

C'mon mang. There's plenty of other rectangular phones that don't totally jack Apple's style.

[bsmooth25]

Originally Posted by The Mongoose

C'mon mang. There's plenty of other rectangular phones that don't totally jack Apple's style.

When Apple decides to put 4g in their phones and move up to a 4 inch screen, will they be jackin Samsung's style because Samsung did it first?

I will give you this though...the hardest thing for me to stomach about the SG3 is the physical home button and the style of Touchwiz. It is reminiscent of an iPhone.

[The Mongoose]

Originally Posted by bsmooth25

When Apple decides to put 4g in their phones and move up to a 4 inch screen, will they be jackin Samsung's style because Samsung did it first?

That's not quite the same thing, is it.

Samsung's own attorneys couldn't distinguish between a Galaxy Tab 10.1 and an iPad from like 20 ft.

If you push me, I'll admit there are some things Apple has patented that don't seem to be patentable. But this ban on recent Samsung stuff seems reasonable to me, because they aren't just jacking concepts and useable stuff - they are jacking style. They even hired the chick from the Apple commercials for their commercials.

The swipe to unlock type stuff, the having a phone number that appears anywhere be press-able to make a call stuff, that's all arguable. And I'll still probably take Apple's side on that stuff too. But Samsung has been completely unabashed in their recent jackings, to the extent that judges are telling them it's too close. It's because they are copying the style of the product, not things like 4g or screen size.

[bsmooth25]

Originally Posted by The Mongoose

Samsung's own attorneys couldn't distinguish between a Galaxy Tab 10.1 and an iPad from like 20 ft.

I hear ya. But stand 20 feet away from a flat screen tv and tell me who the manufacturer is. Nobody is getting sued over that. This is where smartphones are right now and it's the game Samsung is playing. Apple is fighting the wrong battle in my opinion. Shapes of boxes and icons are irrelevant. If Apple just simply makes an undeniable better product, Samsung will look like a cheap knock off. Instead, Samsung is taking the best of Apple and then trying to make the rest better and Apple is saying "that's not fair." Business isn't fair.

[The Mongoose]

Fair or not, there are rules. Ford isn't allowed to make a car that looks just like a Porshce 911. They can approximate it, or get close to it, but at some point it becomes a knockoff.

There are interesting arguments that there should be no protection at all for any intellectual property whatsoever. I like some of these arguments, specifically the libertarian ones that essentially ask, what right does anyone have to stop me from assembling property that I own in a certain manner? If I own all the parts that an iPhone consists of, why can't I assemble them in a manner that makes them an iPhone? They're mine to do with as I please.

The problem I have with it is when people start making money off such arrangements. That's just ripping somebody else's idea off for simple monetary profit, which feels like a scumbag move to me. And as discussed earlier, I like living in a culture where people have an incentive to create cool stuff. Allowing them to patent product ideas for exclusive use makes sense to me.

[bigdaddysaints]

hate to tell ya, no one is buying an Android tablet because it looks like an Ipad.. if you buy and Android tablet, its because you want an Android tablet........


Apple didn't invent the touch screen phone, they didn't invent the smartphone, they didn't invent the rectangle.. if anything RIM started the smartphone revolution, not Apple..