Apple Punts

[Gnosis]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20094372

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19989750

Serves 'em right.

 

[Deleted member 178]

yes useless lawsuits for hypocrites reasons...

Apple has a worm inside and will rot...

 

[Exterminator]

I really dont like Apple so I say good for them.I have an iphone but thats it for me.Even though it is jaibroken I still dont care for it.I would prefer a samsung or any other tablet on the market over an ipad.I just dont get the loyal apple fans standing in line paying high prices for an ihone,ipad,ect. when you could walk in somewhere and get something else that is better {without any"apple" restrictions} for less money.Then they sue everyone.I wish I could sue them for crappy products.Three days and Im done with that iphone!!!! Samsung Galaxy S3 here I come.

 

[HeffeD]

..I just dont get the loyal apple fans standing in line paying high prices for an ihone,ipad,ect. when you could walk in somewhere and get something else that is better {without any"apple" restrictions} for less money.

It's the status of owning it. Have you ever noticed that people who own iPhones never just call it a phone? It's always, "My iPhone".

I make fun of people relentlessly because of that... I lump them in with the high fashion crowd that will call an article of clothing by it's designer's name, instead of what it actually is. The only reason to do that is an attempt to impress others with what you have.

 

[Gnosis]

" Have you ever noticed that people who own iPhones never just call it a phone? It's always, "My iPhone". "

They are causing "smug" problems like the South Park, Colorado Prius owners.

 

[Exterminator]

It's the status of owning it. Have you ever noticed that people who own iPhones never just call it a phone? It's always, "My iPhone".

lol....I think it should be called an "ipod with a phone" or as you said "My ipod with a phone"

 

[LoftedAphid86]

But if you read apple's site:

"The extreme simplicity of the Apple design is striking. Overall it has undecorated flat surfaces with a plate of glass on the front all the way out to a very thin rim and a blank back. There is a crisp edge around the rim and a combination of curves, both at the corners and the sides. The design looks like an object the informed user would want to pick up and hold. It is an understated, smooth and simple product. It is a cool design."

"The informed user's overall impression of each of the Samsung Galaxy Tablets is the following. From the front they belong to the family which includes the Apple design; but the Samsung products are very thin, almost insubstantial members of that family with unusual details on the back. They do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool."

They've made sure to only include the legal judgement that says that Samsung's product is 'not as cool'.

However, in a case tried in Germany regarding the same patent, the court found that Samsung engaged in unfair competition by copying the iPad design. A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple's design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc. So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.

If you pay attention to what is in bold, you'll see that they haven't actually admitted to anything. They've just said that the UK does not believe that Samsung has has copied their design. 'Recognized' gives it away. 'Far more popular' shows that they don't actually care at all for the loss.
Typical apple.

 

[Gnosis]

"If you pay attention to what is in bold, you'll see that they haven't actually admitted to anything. They've just said that the UK does not believe that Samsung has has copied their design. 'Recognized' gives it away. 'Far more popular' shows that they don't actually care at all for the loss."


Well, Apple is used to getting it's way, and when it does not, it gives up easily. That is a huge advantage for those that Apple frivilously attacks; they can start filing very complex counter suits and make it hard on Apple if nothing else. If Apple competitors are smart about it they can use their marketing budgets for counter suits, and just like commercials, the sheer publicity will be good marketing, especially since people are getting fed up with Apple's antics.

 

[Ink]

"The extreme simplicity of the Apple design is striking." -- Like a piece of blank paper.

 

[Gnosis]

After seeing and messing around with my son's Samsung Android phone, it makes Apple look really generic.
Also, I have noticed lately that at the internet cafes the older people and (or) novices look really impressed with their shiny new Apple pads and wipes. It is a lesson in naivety.

Edit:

I mean, just think. If a few reputable internet security companies had not unselfishly come up with anti-malware apps for Apple, they would be up a red tide river in China without antibiotics and chemotherapy. Was Apple going to take care of their own false-sense-of-security issues? If so, how long before Apple came up with their own in-house security suite or anti-malware app that would be effective when compared to unselfish industry leaders in Europe that release quality freeware? Two years? Three years? One year?