Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Blocks Sale of Galaxy Tab 10.1 In Australia

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the about-that-rent-we're-seeking dept.

Australia 316

lukehopewell1 writes "Apple has obtained an injunction from an Australian court effectively blocking the sale of the new Android Honeycomb-powered Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1v. Apple Australia claims that the unit infringes on 10 of the Cupertino, California-based company's patents including the slide to unlock functionality as well as the edge-bounce feature. Samsung will provide Apple Australia with three units for study in coming weeks to ascertain whether or not the Korean gadget maker did in fact infringe on Apple's patented intellectual property."

cancel ×

316 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Sounds like it's the one to buy then (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956222)

Thanks for the review Apple!

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956242)

Just what I was thinking too!

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (3, Insightful)

oztiks (921504) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956574)

Yeah, talk about feeding the beast.

Galaxy Tab is sooo good even Apple's tried to stop its release!

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (3, Funny)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956280)

Thanks for the review Apple!

Yeah thanks Apple, and here's a brick for that walled garden. I bet you know just where to stick it, but so that you don't infringe on any patents, be sure to stick it SIDEWAYS.

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956320)

I bet you know just where to stick it, but so that you don't infringe on any patents, be sure to stick it SIDEWAYS.

You're holding it wrong.

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (3, Insightful)

Dr Max (1696200) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956328)

If you can't do better then sue better.

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (-1, Troll)

node 3 (115640) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956464)

If you can't do better then sue better.

"Can't do better"? That's what Samsung is accused with, not Apple.

Samsung copies Apple, Apple brings on litigation, and Slashdot cries, "hey Apple, why can't you do better?" WTF?

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (4, Interesting)

Max Littlemore (1001285) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956508)

Samsung didn't copy Apple any more than Apple copied a whole bunch of previous products. Samsung has definitely improved on what Apple has done and that is why Apple is feeling threatened.

I have both an iPhone4 and a Galaxy S. The Galaxy S running Android 2.3.4, which is what the SGS II ships with, looks and feels very different to the iPhone. It also provides a much more useful tool than the iPhone in that you can send files over bluetooth, use it as a mass storage device without needing iTunes, watch flash videos, etc etc. Apple knows this and they are scared.

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (1)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956532)

Samsung didn't copy Apple any more than Apple copied a whole bunch of previous products. Samsung has definitely improved on what Apple has done and that is why Apple is feeling threatened. I'm not sure I agree [counternotions.com] .

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (2)

uglyduckling (103926) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956662)

Re-read what you've written: improved on what Apple has done. It's the "what Apple has done" bit that may indicate patent infringement. Rightly or wrongly, patents are used by companies to protect their revenue-making ability. You have to be totally blind to not see the Galaxy S as (at least in part) a copy of Apple's case design and GUI.

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (2)

Khyber (864651) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956678)

*slide to unlock*

Multiple devices have had this for ages - it's called the 'hold' switch (present on PSPs, old Sony walkmans, etc.)

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (2)

dakameleon (1126377) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956736)

Unfortunately, the standard for prior art on patents is not "It works kinda like that other thing I saw in a different context." - Apple's "innovation" in taking the hold switch concept and implementing it in a touch-based interface is sufficient for it to be granted a patent, for better or worse.

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (5, Insightful)

myurr (468709) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956580)

Copying doesn't preclude improving upon, so that isn't what Samsung is accused of. Plus the two patents mentioned are for trivial UX features that are hardly ground breaking innovation in and of themselves.

Part of the reason that people are venting at Apple in this case is because yet again we see the absurdity of the patent and legal systems ably demonstrated by what is a pretty lame lawsuit (we think this product may infringe our patents, so ban all imports and give us full access so we can decide if this is actually the case or not - i.e. they're not even saying that it definitely infringes). I mean seriously, how on earth is sliding your finger across the screen to unlock the device something so amazingly innovative that Apple should be able to patent it?!

Another big part of the reason is that instead of competing by producing a better product and letting the market decide, Apple are increasingly hiding behind their lawyers. Their response to Android in general has been to sue rather than to find a better way to compete in the open market place. They could produce better devices, a wider range of devices, they could release the OS and allow other manufacturers to build iDevices, they could choose to specialise in various niches, they could try and revolutionise another market sector, etc. They have chosen to do absolutely none of those things, despite the end consumer benefitting from any and all of them, instead releasing relatively minor incremental updates to the same products and attempting to use the legal system to wipe out the competition.

The average consumer never benefits when a single manufacturer focussed on the premium end of the market is given free reign of entire classes of device. As a consumer, even an Apple fanboi (if you are one), you should be cheering on the competition knowing that it means more people will find the ideal device for them and that the competition will push all the manufacturers to keep improving their products at a far faster rate than if one company maintains a monopoly.

Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956614)

Did you brute force that vacant account's password, or did you pay off the original owner? Either way, clever approach of feigning legitimacy.

Add "on a mobile computing device" to anything! (3, Insightful)

mykos (1627575) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956232)

Old is new once again!

I am fully confident that this thread will demonstrate the utmost civility of Slashdot users.

Invalidation game (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956240)

KDE3 Kopete and Konqueror had edge bounce (removed from KDE4 due to ugly code). Apple now infridge 9 patents.

We will play a game, everybody invalidate one patent until they run out.

Re:Invalidation game (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956286)

Glad to see you're not infringing on that spell-check patent.

Rule number one (-1, Troll)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956248)

No poofters! [google.com]

In your electorate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956266)

Bob Katter is that you?

Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened. (4, Insightful)

Kenja (541830) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956252)

Guess these new Adroid tablets may be worth taking a look at if they have Apple this scared. Course they could just be a bunch of jerks... hard to tell these days.

The either/or logical fallacy (1)

renegadesx (977007) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956276)

Why does it have to be one or the other? EIther way the Galaxy Tab does look pretty cool, then again I said I was going to wait for the Asus "Slider" tablet.

Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (-1, Troll)

The Dawn Of Time (2115350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956452)

Yeah, that's Apple being scared. It's definitely not your wishful thinking projecting emotions onto a business decision.

Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (3, Insightful)

mjwx (966435) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956506)

Yeah, that's Apple being scared. It's definitely not your wishful thinking projecting emotions onto a business decision.

They're trying to block the entry of a competitor via the legal system as opposed to competing with them once the product is released.

That is not a business decision, that's an admission they cannot compete.

Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956608)

That is not a business decision, that's an admission they cannot compete.

Because Sumsung's Android gear has been selling so well they've decided to no longer report the numbers [techcrunch.com] , to ...um... not make anyone jealous. You can see why Apple might be shaking in their boots.

Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (3, Insightful)

mjwx (966435) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956634)

That is not a business decision, that's an admission they cannot compete.

Because Sumsung's Android gear has been selling so well they've decided to no longer report the numbers [techcrunch.com] , to ...um... not make anyone jealous. You can see why Apple might be shaking in their boots.

Could you have found a more biased site. They readily admit they are paid by Apple. Besides that proves nothing. If Apple isn't scared, why are they trying to get the courts to prevent Samsung from selling a much demanded competing product. Sorry if this shatters your fanboyish delusions.

Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (3, Insightful)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956640)

Who makes the screens in the iPad? Who is begging who to please supply them with more screens?

I think Apple is scared, that it might not be getting the next generation of screens if Samsung has need for it themselves. If Samsung can make more money selling tablets then selling screens, Apple is screwed because Samsung is currently in the lead in the screen market especially oled.

Also, this isn't just about tablets, iPhone sales are lower then Android sales and Samsung sells a lot of Android phones.

Apple is trying to get rid of the competition. Same as MS did with IE and we all know how that worked out for browser users. Apple without competition would be as boring in its line-up as MS.

Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956708)

Who makes the screens in the iPad?

LG

Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (0)

The Dawn Of Time (2115350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956712)

Your logic doesn't pass the sniff test on several levels. I'd bother with rebutting specifics but you're so far from reality it's kinda pointless.

You'd do better to look past your own biases when performing these analyses, assuming you want your opinion to mean anything outside of an echo chamber of people predisposed to agreeing with you.

Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (1)

Tasha26 (1613349) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956528)

Can't Samsung use its political connections to block iPad in the whole of East of Asia?

Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956594)

Cheap Android tablets: so versatile [bbyopen.com] . (Note: don't click if you can't take a joke.)

Really? (4, Insightful)

YodasEvilTwin (2014446) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956256)

It's blocked UNTIL Apple can prove they infringed? Australia, crushing due process harder than the U.S. since 1994.

Re:Really? (1)

renegadesx (977007) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956344)

It's blocked UNTIL Apple can prove they infringed? Australia, crushing due process harder than the U.S. since 1996.

Fixed, Howard was elected in 1996

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956428)

So that's a judgement of "you're guilty until we prove you're guilty"... WTF!

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956556)

So that's a judgement of "you're guilty until we prove you're guilty"... WTF!

no it's a judgement to be remanded in custody dumbass

Re:Really? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956354)

I suppose you think all criminals should be allowed to roam free until a court finds them guilty? If substantial evidence is presented then they would be remanded in custody until the court date. Are you not aware that this is how the US operates too?
In this case it seems the court deemed the evidence against Samsung to be substantial and relevant and have henceforth done the equivalent of not granting them bail by imposing an injunction.

Re:Really? (5, Informative)

rust627 (1072296) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956382)

Australia, enforcing US Patents and copyrights harder than the U.S. since 1994.

Fixed it for you.

Since an earlier Australian Government signed a 'free trade agreement' Australia has been in the interesting position of having to enforce US Patents and Copyright Laws above and beyond our own.

Plus the 'free trade agreement' between our 2 countries means that US companies (and individuals) are free to pretty much do as they wish here, but we are still considered to be foreigners and subject to all the various tariffs and import restrictions as any other country in the US.

Re:Really? (1)

Harlequin80 (1671040) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956392)

It's called an injunction and I would have thought the US would have something similar. Apple have claimed that the importation and sale of the galaxy will cause irreparable harm that cannot be reasonably fixed through the payment of money. The judge has accepted this claim and so has issued an injunction on Samsung. But it's not without risk to Apple. If Apple loses the case they will have to pay Samsung significant financial penalties and may have other non financial penalties levied against them. This is pretty normal practice.

Re:Really? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956524)

And what about the damage to Samsung? If retailers see that Apple is going after potential competitors with lawsuits that could prohibit shipment of the competitors' products for who knows how long, why would those retailers commit to buying the competition's device? Apple is playing dirty pool, litigating instead of slogging it out in a fair, open market. Apple has been found to infringe upon some of Samsung's patents, too, by WIPO. Why is the Australian government permitting Apple to sell those offending products in Australia? Someone is accepting bribes somewhere down under.

Non-Aussies probably wont understand this (3, Funny)

mjwx (966435) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956416)

Apple's legal counsel Christian Dimitriadis

Said the Ipad 2 was "fooly sikh" and that Apple "wants if fuckin money fuckin".

Meanwhile

Samsung's legal counsel Neil Murray

Said that Apple was being a "wuss and should harden up" and that their counsel was a "flamin galah" stating that this case was "a few tinny's short of a six pack". He also commented elected to inform apple on "where to stuff ya bloody law suit".

Re:Non-Aussies probably wont understand this (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956680)

why the hell are you speaking in "aussie slang" just because its a international web site, and trying to show everyone how much of a dick head you are?

do you think poms come in and "pom" up comments just just because the article is about them??

no... shows how much of a cunt hole you are.

Re:Really? (1)

Cimexus (1355033) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956592)

Sigh - this is what happens when articles/summaries are written by people with no idea how the law works. Do a bit of reading of the court's actual words, and generally about injunctions and discovery while you're at it. Slashdot always likes to make things sound more ridiculous/inflammatory than they really are.

Yes, I need to see this Galaxy Tab then (1)

big_fish24 (321622) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956284)

I agree. It sounds like it must be good enough to have Apple scared.

Re:Yes, I need to see this Galaxy Tab then (2)

Radiophobic (1973144) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956324)

Apple doesn't sue someone because they are scared, they sue them because they are a competitor.

Re:Yes, I need to see this Galaxy Tab then (0)

The Dawn Of Time (2115350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956384)

Well, to be technically correct, they sue them because they believe their rights have been infringed.

Re:Yes, I need to see this Galaxy Tab then (5, Insightful)

mgiuca (1040724) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956438)

Samsung are clearly infringing on Apple's right to be the only tablet device manufacturer. Just like IBM should rightly have been the only computer manufacturer.

Re:Yes, I need to see this Galaxy Tab then (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956536)

and Google the only search provider

Re:Yes, I need to see this Galaxy Tab then (2)

Klintus Fang (988910) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956572)

lol. google was a late entrant into the search provider space. there were at least a dozen others already by the time the came along and finally taught everyone how too make money off of internet advertising... ;)

Re:Yes, I need to see this Galaxy Tab then (0)

The Dawn Of Time (2115350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956726)

I often wonder, when people say things like you just said - do you feel clever for having said it? Was there a point? I mean it doesn't actually have any bearing on the discussion, and it doesn't reflect any sort of facts in any way. It's not even really much of an opinion. It's just... hot air, floating uselessly out of reach.

I also wonder how so many self-identified intelligent people can have so little sense of how business is done.

And they have to send 3 units? (1)

mgiuca (1040724) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956288)

What the hell? If you get sued you have to send three review units to your competitor for analysis?

Uhh... can I get three Galaxy Tabs if I sue Samsung too?

Re:And they have to send 3 units? (1)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956402)

Samsung will provide Apple Australia with three units for study in coming weeks to ascertain whether or not the Korean gadget maker did in fact infringe on Apple's patented intellectual property

Even better, apparently Apple gets to decide if it infringes. Can't wait to hear their decision!

Re:And they have to send 3 units? (2)

mjwx (966435) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956476)

Samsung will provide Apple Australia with three units for study in coming weeks to ascertain whether or not the Korean gadget maker did in fact infringe on Apple's patented intellectual property

Even better, apparently Apple gets to decide if it infringes. Can't wait to hear their decision!

Not quite, Apple get a chance to prove it in court. The court gets to decide if the infringement has actually taken place.

If Apple cant prove their claims they open themselves up to a heap of claims for compensation by Samsung.

A very high stakes game of poker here, with the pot being measured in billions of Aussie dollars (about 1.1 USD).

Apple is getting real worried (4, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956670)

They've had a massive rise in profitability that anyone who isn't stuck in a cave can't have missed. However, what some people don't seem to realize is it has almost entirely been in a new market, consumer electronics, not their computer division. Their computer sales have gone up, but not near to the levels of their consumer electronics and only after the CE products made them a name.

So if they want to keep that profitability, and all companies want that, they have to keep that market.

For a time, no problem. It started with the iPod which became a fashion accessory. People didn't get MP3 players, they got iPods. It was what was cool to have and nobody could compete because nobody else could make an iPod. Well that market is pretty saturated these days. People don't buy new MP3 players all the time, and the iPod fashion has faded a bit (though it is still strong). So while it makes them money, it doesn't make them money like it used to.

Enter the iPhone and now iPad. The iPhone did great because it captured a new part of the smartphone market: casual users. Other smartphones were very business oriented, the iPhone was for consumers who wanted a toy. The iPad of course went in to a new market entirely, since tablets like it really aren't competition for full out tablet PCs.

All is well and Apple makes billions... However Android is a real threat to that. It has become extremely good and has been eating away at the iPhone market (and everyone else's). The tablet market was safe, but now it is entering there. It has a ways to go but is getting better at a rapid pace, Google improves it very quickly.

Apple is seeing their consumer electronics markets evaporate, turn in to regular commodity markets where you have to compete on price which Apple has never done well. This won't kill Apple, but it could seriously shrink them and companies view that as just as bad.

So they have to attack and try and stop it, in any way they can.

I just hope they don't succeed. I don't want a world where only one company can provide certain kinds of technology. Competition is nearly always good for the consumer.

Re:And they have to send 3 units? (1)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956714)

Ok, the post was mostly a joke, but if you want to get quantitative...

"Billions of Aussie dollars"... eh, yeah. Quick search shows consensus estimate of ~300k iPads sold in Australia. Let's be conservative and call that 500k tablets total, at $500 per unit that's still only $250M gross revenue, and even with Apple's absurd $200 profit margins that's under $100M net for the entire market. Samsung's share of the market is TINY right now, probably a few million in profit at best in Australia. Patent licensing would make up a fraction of that per unit, so we're probably talking a couple million Aussie dollars, not billions.

Australia might be a good test market for a product (or lawsuit), but in the world of consumer electronics sales, it's about as high stakes as the Sunday game at the retirement home.

Re:And they have to send 3 units? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956498)

I assume (not having RTFA) that the summary and possibly the article are just poor miserable confused bastards misunderstanding the concept of "discovery". Apple's lawyers demand 3 GalTabs so they can, uh, study them to find the evidence to build their court case (nothing to do with wanting better tablets than their iPads, no way!), such as videos of someone swiping a GalTab and it unlocking. Similarly, Samsung lawyers can get whatever they ask for (subject to judicial approval) from Apple that they think will allow them to make their case -- maybe documents surrounding the filing of the patent, I guess.

As to them "ascertaining" the infringement, you get your ass kicked pretty hard if it can be proven you got this far without being certain, so I guarantee their lawyers never said that.

iPhone Application Development (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956302)

Apple has a very big and growing market in the hole world that is increasing day by day.Vinay from iPhone Application Development India [kryptonsoft.com] Team, KryptonSoft, India

Re:iPhone Application Development (1)

anshulajain (1359933) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956444)

Get your grammar right before advertising your stuff (which you should not do) over here.

Just go away Apple! (0, Troll)

therufus (677843) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956310)

Apple haven't made a decent product in years, they can hardly be called innovators, they're just a marketing monster. And when someone does something vaguely distasteful to them, they sue them. Maybe Apple is just a branch of the Cult of $cientology.

The fact that Apple have such market share is proof that society is slowly getting dumber and dumber.

Re:Just go away Apple! (-1, Troll)

Divebus (860563) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956346)

Maybe Apple is tired of everyone riding their coattails. What ...and everyone else thought of the form factor for these compelling phones and tablets first? Not one manufacturer has demonstrated an original thought beyond copying Apple with the exception of Microsoft. Sure, the knockoffs have some minutia as differentiators, but come up with something different if you can, knockoff manufacturers.

Re:Just go away Apple! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956582)

Fact: Microsoft started talking about tablets in the late 1990s and started the form factor in the early 2000s (don't take my word for it, Google it).

Also, I would argue that the iPhone (and I own two of them, mind you) is not a very compelling phone in and of itself. It is true that their use of the capacitive screen was relatively novel. The OS is just the same old paradigm we've seen for years in desktop/laptop OSes. The iPhone wasn't really hit until they allowed developers to create native apps and sell through the App Store. The App Store and the content created by third parties was/is the compelling "product".

Re:Just go away Apple! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956628)

Fact: Microsoft talks a lot.

Re:Just go away Apple! (1)

Divebus (860563) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956702)

Facts are a little shallow today. Look up the Dynabook [osnews.com] idea from 1968, published by Xerox PARC as a research project in 1972. That's really the first concept tablet by Alan Kay(pro) who later became an Apple Fellow in 1984. Guess what he had a hand in there? The Apple Newton came out in 1993, as flawed as that was (if the Nokia N800 was a tablet, then so was the Newton).

The Microsoft/HP/Compaq tablet concepts showed up way after that in 2001. They were a joke relative to what we're seeing today - they were the concrete patio tile of portable computing. That form factor never took off as a must-have product with the general public but it did find uses in industrial applications. Ok, so it was just a laptop with a screen that swivels and a stylus to tap on it.

There was no thunderous stampede to make anything like tablets until the iPad.

Re:Just go away Apple! (1)

Radiophobic (1973144) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956362)

Certainly not innovative. However ipad is a decent product, as evidenced by the fact that none of the competing tablets seem to give users as good an experience. The iphone is good too; it took over two years before someone had made a decent competing smartphone. Google owns this market now, (completely justified, android is an awesome phone OS). I doubt android would be as good as it is now if it wasn't for the fact that they needed to reach the bar that had been raised by the iphone.

Re:Just go away Apple! (0)

BSDimwit (583028) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956522)

Google owns dick. iPhone is the single most sold smartphone brand presently and Apple makes more than 50% of all smartphone profit and probably 80% to 90% of tablet profit. Google is giving Android away for free. Now if you were to say Samsung or HTC, then your comparison might be valid but Google only makes the OS, not the phones themselves. If you are going to throw in the whole of Android then it would more honest of you to at least count all iOS based devices too when talking about which mobile OS is reigning supreme at the moment.

Re:Just go away Apple! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956558)

I know it's pointless to argue with a troll/fanboy, but check your statistics.

You're many orders of magnitude off; and even a fanboy can appreciate hard numbers.

Re:Just go away Apple! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956642)

Whatever makes you feel better. You can divide up the market however you like to make it sound like Apple is on top of the world, but at the rate Android is growing Apple will soon become a small player no matter how you slice it, much like they are in the PC world. Making people pay way too much in profit per device will be the only thing saving them.

Re:Just go away Apple! (1)

rhook (943951) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956728)

Sorry, but more Android phones are sold than iPhones.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/196035/android_outsells_the_iphone_no_big_surprise.html [pcworld.com]

"Retail research kingpin the NPD Group is reporting that Android-based phones are now outselling iPhones. Or at least they did last quarter in terms of unit sales in the U.S. according to NPD's study, which found that RIM's BlackBerries held 36 percent of the market, phones running Google's Android had 28 percent, and the iPhone was at 21 percent."

Re:Just go away Apple! (1)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956432)

Oh, come on.

Apple the corporate entity is a marketing monster, yes, and they are also a totally anti-competitive, control-freaks as well.

But to say they haven't made a decent product (or as one reply to you said "certainly not innovative") is absurd. They completely redefined the concepts of smartphones and tablet computers, and all of their competitors are basically scrambling to parrot their basic design innovations.

Do I agree with their marketing tactics, locked down platform, or stifling app store policies? No. But that doesn't mean I can't give them credit for creating a brilliant example of engineering and human interface design.

Re:Just go away Apple! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956690)

Yes, they make a decent product at a premium price, but I wouldn't call them innovative. About the only thing they've done which is innovative is the iTunes store, where you can buy music and apps, which get seamlessly installed on your device and "just works". Of course the PC version of iTunes is a total piece of crap, but I digress.

Beyond that, the iPhone is just an iTouch with a phone glued on to it, and Blackberry was there a long time before iPhone. The only thing that differentiates Blackberry from iPhone is... iTunes.

The iPad is just a giant iTouch. And in the end the iTouch is just a spiffed up Nintendo DS, and they were also on the market a long time before iTouch.

Decent products, yes. Marketing monster yes. Innovative, no, not at all.

Re:Just go away Apple! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956578)

Apple haven't made a decent product in years, they can hardly be called innovators, they're just a marketing monster. And when someone does something vaguely distasteful to them, they sue them. Maybe Apple is just a branch of the Cult of $cientology.

The fact that Apple have such market share is proof that society is slowly getting dumber and dumber.

Are you fucking serious? How have they not made a decent product in years? I'd love to know what you've contributed to the tech world to give you enough credit to bash Apple. Your shitty comment towards them doesn't count as a contribution either.

Your comment showcasing ignorance, judgment, and just plain fucking stupidity is enough to prove society is getting dumber and dumber. Congrats.

Re:Just go away Apple! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956586)

You're so going to be modded down by the small-penised hipsters who LOVE their itunes.

Clearly Apply think different. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956314)

Guess the company?

Q1: 1998: They are so concerned about their lack of innovation, they need a huge pack of lawyers to prevent competition.
Q2: 2011: They are so concerned about their lack of innovation, they need a huge pack of lawyers to prevent competition.

A1: Microsoft
A2: Apple

  I'm sorry, this little pup is not buying apple, itunes or any other of their product range or services ever again (That's about $2K/year they are down). I've just bought an Android Tablet today. viva la difference.

Patents is the new copyright (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956322)

Sounds like they hired Darl McBride to head up Apple's legal team.

The world needs patent reform (5, Insightful)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956364)

Seriously, if "Slide to Lock" deserves a patent, someone in the USPTO should be hit over the head with a hammer. Repeatedly.

Re:The world needs patent reform (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956398)

I'm sorry, but I hold a patent over hitting people over the head repeatedly with hammers.

If you wish to continue with your plan you will have to pay me a license fee per head hammered.

Re:The world needs patent reform (1)

sofar (317980) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956478)

prior art for "slide to unlock" - go to your local hardware store and get a "door chain" type locking device.

prior art for "hit over the head (...)" was posted in floppy.c from Minix: http://www.raspberryginger.com/jbailey/minix/html/floppy_8c-source.html#l00979 [raspberryginger.com] [raspberryginger.com]

However, just for kicks, I'll take one if you do indemnation for repercussions of using the patented invention.

Re:The world needs patent reform (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956410)

I could swipe up the screen to lock on my palm os pda.

Re:The world needs patent reform (1)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956440)

Hell, you should patent that! It's a great idea. And considering Apple is using "Slide to UNlock", you could probably get away with it.

Re:The world needs patent reform (3, Insightful)

Urkki (668283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956466)

Seriously, if "Slide to Lock" deserves a patent, someone in the USPTO should be hit over the head with a hammer. Repeatedly.

I think this may have already happened. It would explain a lot.

Re:The world needs patent reform (1)

Yaur (1069446) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956626)

I think this may have already happened. It would explain a lot.

I believe the preferred method is to hit them over the head with a sack of money.

Patented in what country? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956372)

I'm presuming that the patents in question were granted within the United States of America.

A few questions are floating around my head:
* How exactly does United States patent law apply to a Korean company selling products within Australia?
* Why is this not being addressed against Samsung within the United States where the patent was presumably granted?
* Is this tied to the relatively recent free trade agreements between Australia and the United States? Is Korea not a partner?

Re:Patented in what country? (1)

c0lo (1497653) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956436)

I'm presuming that the patents in question were granted within the United States of America.

A few questions are floating around my head: * How exactly does United States patent law apply to a Korean company selling products within Australia?

The answer [wikipedia.org] .

* Why is this not being addressed against Samsung within the United States where the patent was presumably granted?

It is. But with the Aussie dollar on the rise, Australia started to become an interesting market, so why not in Australia as well?

* Is this tied to the relatively recent free trade agreements between Australia and the United States? Is Korea not a partner?

Re. US - the agreement is not THAT recent (2004). Recent is only Australia as a patent battle ground.
Re. Korea: nope, in negotiation only [dfat.gov.au] – long after the FTA with US has been signed.

Re:Patented in what country? (1)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956458)

I'm sure Apple and Samsung and all those folks are trying to file patents wherever their products are likely to show up. I'm sure that, if a judge approved the injunction, it's not just based on a US-granted patent; it'd have to be either a local patent, or a non-local patent in combination with some treaty which made it reasonable for the judge to bring down the gavel.

I presume that this is more rhetorical curiosity than real curiosity, but I'll go ahead and answer question #2 as well: they are pursuing it in the US as well. There simply hasn't been an injunction to my knowledge. Why? Well, if only PJ would follow this stuff, we'd actually understand it instead of throwing out the first emotional response that comes to mind.

Re:Patented in what country? (1)

Yaur (1069446) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956650)

which brings up an interesting point. What happens if a patent should be invalid, but Australia is forced to enforce it due to treaty obligations. I assume that an Australian judge can neither invalidate a US patent nor abrogate Australia's treaty obligations.

...and...? (-1, Troll)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956388)

Between the wholesale theft of the UI and the whole "Smart Case" incident, I think Apple's got a reasonable claim here.

Yes, patents bad, boo hoo. When you're a small independent startup, sure, let's talk about how crappy patents are. When you're a billion dollar a year mega corporation, pay the damn licensing fees.

Re:...and...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956418)

theft of the UI

oh fuck off, if you're going to talk about it in terms of theft then apple stole the "grid of icons" UI

Re:...and...? (-1, Troll)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956500)

I love it how ACs come in here and try to re-write history [counternotions.com] .

Seriously, the volume of venom and vitriol whenever Apple does ANYTHING is ridiculous. There are a dozen handset and tablet makers whom Apple is not suing for anything, and their actions haven't stopped a bazillion Android activations per day. They're clearly not stifling competition.

This business seems like dancing in a mosh pit, and Apple's right in the middle. There's a lot of incidental contact, and Apple's not doing anything because they don't have any basis, and they're bumping some other guys pretty good themselves. But if you've ever been in a mosh pit and seen that one asshole who keeps throwing an elbow whenever you go by him... that's what Apple thinks of Samsung. Of course they're going to try to jump them in the parking lot.

Re:...and...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956652)

Only a douchebag Apple-user would use a a moshpit analogy.

Re:...and...? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956658)

I love it how ACs come in here and try to re-write history [counternotions.com] .

oh well a registered account, do you feel special? your link ignores everything prior to 2007 but just so you know the world did exist before the iphone.
were apple first with a touchscreen phone? No.
were apple first with a grid of icons on a touchscreen phone? No.
were apple first with apps on a touchscreen phone? No.

I can see you have difficulty believing that such things existed before 2007 and that these 'magical' things could not have been invented by anyone but apple, but samsung didn't 'steal' any ideas any more than apple 'stole' those ideas, you can't have it both ways.
I like apple, and i like most of their products, but i hate douchebags who act as if apple are the inventors of everything its ok when apple takes ideas from others but not when others take ideas from apple.

Re:...and...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956738)

better call the lawyers!
apple [cbsi.com.au] are being fucking hypocrites [320gbharddrive.net]

Re:...and...? (1)

jeti (105266) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956546)

If you can "steal" the UI just by looking at it, what valuable information do the patents hold?
And if the patents don't hold valuable information, how do they "promote the progress of
science and useful arts"?

Re:...and...? (1)

qxcv (2422318) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956588)

Yes, patents bad, boo hoo. When you're a small independent startup, sure, let's talk about how crappy patents are. When you're a billion dollar a year mega corporation, pay the damn licensing fees.

I fear you misunderstand the patent system. There generally aren't licensing fees, and if there are then they're guaranteed to be exorbitant as IP owners can charge what they wish. If you can get the patent granted, than you can do whatever you wish with both the patent subject and the people unlucky enough to have implemented it. Read up about submarine patents [wikimedia.org] and you'll understand what I mean.

Re:...and...? (1)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956718)

Between the wholesale theft of the UI

Right. So, how many UI elements has Apple copied from other OSes and projects? Several hundreds? And that is not wrong, but when someone copies from Apple it suddenly becomes wrong?

Personally I feel being able to patent _ideas_ is downright stupid altogether, you should only be able to patent a specific implementation and even then copyright-laws actually do a better job of protecting a specific implementation. Being able to copy good ideas and improve on them is a GOOD thing for all end-users, it's bad only for the company who doesn't want their competitors to be able to enter the same market.

In before... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956470)

black market Galaxy Tab 10.1vs flood Australia.

Australian Slide to Unlock patent (2)

Spikeles (972972) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956560)

This looks like the patent here Unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image [ipaustralia.gov.au] .

It's already in the process of being rejected due to a re-examination, "Claim 1 is not novel (and lack an inventive step) in light of the prior art document"

Although it doesn't help they have 21months before it will lapse due to the rejection.

Patent This! (1)

umbrellasd (876984) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956606)

Someone must have the "Wipe to Clean" patent on cleaning your butt. That's only reason I can explain the abundance of crap patents like "Slide to Unlock." I'll be submitting my patent for "Pour into Glass" for beverages; I'm sure to make a killing.

This (1)

Wolfling1 (1808594) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956612)

is the reason I do not own a Mac. It is the reason I do not own an iPod or an iPad or an iPhone. And am unlikely to ever do so.

The patent system may be broken, but it is not the patent system that is killing technology, it is Apple. If they can't make all the money from it, then no-one can. I believe that is Mr Jobs' philosophy.

Well, Mr Jobs, you can stick your technology where the sun don't shine.

Re:This (2)

uglyduckling (103926) | more than 3 years ago | (#36956676)

You do realise that all the companies selling any computer or telephony gear that you might want to own have been the initiator or the subject of litigation at one time or another? If you don't want to own tech from any company that has ever brought an injunction or started a lawsuit over fear of patent infringement then you should stay away from: Microsoft, IBM, Adobe, Google, Oracle/Sun, HP, Dell, Samsung, Nokia, Sony, Nintendo etc., etc.. This is normal for the tech industry, even if you just use a truly free Linux distro like Debian you wouldn't be able to buy any decent hardware to run it on.

Till when? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956654)

I didn't know that , but maybe the court will change this restriction soon or not?
London Removals [thelondonremovals.com]

Good Riddance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36956700)

Whats wrong with developing your own bloody IP? Oh, right, its hard. Copying is easy, right, I get it.

Instead of creating their own unique solution and taking the necessary years to flesh it out and polish it, Samsung took the short route and got a tad too inspired by the successful products of their biggest customer. Guess what, its coming back to bite them. Hard. Surprised? Me, hardly. Is Apple being a bitch by suing? I'd do the same if I was working for years on refining a product, while only to have found it ripped off by a bunch of Me, too! companies which just can't figure it out by themselves.

Toss off the leeches, Apple. You've been bogged down by one who grew big on your innovations before, and the result was the festering mess that is the Wintel desktop, annoying the crap out of millions of users every day. Don't let it happen again. For the doom of mankind.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?