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 Can't Block US Sales of Samsung Devices

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the magic-not-strong-enough-roll-again dept.

Android 213

An anonymous reader snips this good news (for Samsung fans) from Edible Apple "In April of 2011, Apple kicked off what would soon become a global and complex series of litigation disputes when it sued Samsung in the U.S. claiming that its line of Galaxy smartphones and tablets infringed upon Apple's intellectual property and were nothing more than 'slavish' copies. As part of its suit, Apple requested a preliminary injunction that would bar Samsung from selling said products in the U.S. This past Friday, Judge Lucy Koh denied Apple's motion for a preliminary injunction."

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

What's a Samsung fan? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253522)

do they make ceiling fans or something?

Re:What's a Samsung fan? (4, Informative)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253594)

Ok, I'll bite on the bait.

A Samsung fan is just a regular person who doesn't have a deeply compelling brand loyalty. Or at least in the usage in this article summary on Slashdot that is the meaning.

It means, anybody who isn't a Steve-fan.

Re:What's a Samsung fan? (3, Insightful)

nightfell (2480334) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253852)

In other words "everyone who isn't like me is a fanboy".

Re:What's a Samsung fan? (1)

bidule (173941) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254190)

A Samsung fan is just a regular person who doesn't have a deeply compelling brand loyalty.

Same as a Steelers fan is just a regular person who doesn't have a deeply compelling sport loyalty.
Or a Saturn fan is just a regular person who doesn't have a deeply compelling car loyalty.

You know that "fan" comes from "fanatic", yes?

Re:What's a Samsung fan? (3, Informative)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254232)

You know that "fan" comes from "fanatic", yes?

Actually according to Wikipedia it could come from the word fancy: "Paul Dickson, in his Dickson Baseball Dictionary, cites William Henry Nugent's work that claims it comes from fancy, a 19th century term from England that referred mainly to followers of boxing." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_(person) [wikipedia.org]

I'm a steelers fan, but I certainly wouldn't get into any arguments or flamewars about them. Does that mean I'm also a Steelers fanatic?

Re:What's a Samsung fan? (1, Insightful)

bidule (173941) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254462)

You know that "fan" comes from "fanatic", yes?

Actually according to Wikipedia it could come from the word fancy: "Paul Dickson, in his Dickson Baseball Dictionary, cites William Henry Nugent's work that claims it comes from fancy, a 19th century term from England that referred mainly to followers of boxing." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_(person) [wikipedia.org]

"According to that unsupported explanation", yes. But most dictionaries only mention "fanatic" and very few would link it to "fancy" or "fantasy". But I agree with you that fans are more restrained than fanatics. It's just that the irony of hiding fanatism behind that snide remark cracked me up.

Re:What's a Samsung fan? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254704)

Ok, I'll bite on the bait.

A Samsung fan is just a regular person who doesn't have a deeply compelling brand loyalty.

I THINK the colloquial definition of the term "fan" in this context disagrees quite strongly with, to the point of being the very antithesis of, your assertion that "Samsung fans" don't have a deeply compelling brand loyalty.

Of course, maybe that's just me and my high-falutin' book-learnin' and word-smarts.

Re:What's a Samsung fan? (2)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253954)

Actually, yes they do. Samsung Group is a conglomerate that makes and buys and sells nearly every kind of thing imaginable.

Re:What's a Samsung fan? (5, Funny)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253980)

>do they make ceiling fans or something?

They do make fans. And per ROK specifications, they come with timers.

Because, you know, fan death is a leading killer of Koreans.

--
BMO

Good to see. (4, Interesting)

xclr8r (658786) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253562)

Finally some judges are realizing they are being used for judgements to enforce business ^H^H^H^H^H...monopoly by via litigation.

Re:Good to see. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253598)

Did you read the decision? The judge actually agree with Apple on almost all points, except the one that they would suffer irreparable harm. Hence no preliminary injunction. All this means is it goes to trial where Apple is (per the court) likely to win.

Re:Good to see. (5, Informative)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253892)

Maybe you didn't read all of the article either. The judge felt that Apple's patent was invalid. Meaning, the judge didn't "agree with Apple on almost all points, except the one . . . "

Nice spin though.

Re:Good to see. (4, Interesting)

russotto (537200) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253928)

Maybe you didn't read all of the article either. The judge felt that Apple's patent was invalid. Meaning, the judge didn't "agree with Apple on almost all points, except the one . . . "

The judge felt that the D'087 patent was likely invalid (too similar to previous designs), but not the D'677 patent. The D'677 patent covers the black transparent glass-like front surface. I think the judge was wrong in not dismissing that based on it being a functional component, but that's still to be litigated.

Re:Good to see. (4, Informative)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254044)

The judge actually agree with Apple on almost all points, except the one that they would suffer irreparable harm.

Not really true.

To quote TFA;

"Nevertheless, Samsung raised questions of validity regarding Apple’s D’899 patent and Apple did not establish that it would likely to succeed at trial."

Re:Good to see. (0)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254106)

The judge actually agree with Apple on almost all points

"Almost all" except the most important one: Apple's patent.

Re:Good to see. (5, Informative)

tysonedwards (969693) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253614)

No judgement, but a denial of a preliminary injunction that would presumably prevent Samsung from "further irreparably damaging Apple's Brand, image, copyright and patents".

Apple's contention within the case is that Samsung is misappropriating Apple's intellectual property, namely patents related to the design of the iPhone devices, user interface designs, icons, images, and methods of operation.

Samsung's contention is that "there are only so many ways to build a smartphone", and that the elements that Apple is complaining about are either "too broad" or are obvious, and thereby not enforceable.

The judge in this particular case has decided that Apple had not presented sufficient evidence in pre-trial proceedings that would show that Apple would be irreparably damaged through Samsung continuing to sell the products in question within the United States.

Re:Good to see. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253764)

patents related to the design of the iPhone devices, user interface designs, icons, images, and methods of operation.

Patents are supposed to be for inventions.
The terrorists have won.

Re:Good to see. (-1, Offtopic)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254514)

Interestingly this judge is a Korean-American...

Re:Good to see. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254582)

Interestingly, the judge who originally granted an injunction is white.

(above is just to point out how irrelevant OP's comment is)

Re:Good to see. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254014)

No, just lawyers more experienced with this shit. That's the difference between the US and the rest of the world.

Re:Good to see. (1)

Ken Broadfoot (3675) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254078)

Hell yes! It is about time too...

Seems fair... (4, Informative)

Theaetetus (590071) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253666)

Preliminary injunctions are valid where irreparable harm will ensue if they're not issued, and injunctions generally are issued where monetary damages would be inadequate relief. But that's very rare.

This is similar to the recent reversal of the Apple-Samsung injunction in Australia - there, the court said that an injunction was unwarranted, but that Samsung would have to keep detailed records of every penny earned on the products, because they could be on the hook for all of them. Same thing here - if the patents are found valid and Samsung is found to have infringed, they'll owe damages to Apple... but there's no reason to preemptively make those damages $0 by stopping the sale of the product.

Apple hates competition (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253722)

Plain and simple.

"Oh my god, their tablet is like ours! Ban it!"

Re:Apple hates competition (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253882)

Apple don't hate competition. They are in competition. You hate Apple and are also a moron. Not for hating Apple, but just because you are.

Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-patent (5, Funny)

teh31337one (1590023) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253738)

Phone Arena:

Apple gives Samsung advice on non-patent infringing designs

In order to disprove Samsung’s claim, Apple needed to provide alternate design options to prove that Samsung did, in fact, blatantly copy Apple’s design. Some samples from these suggestions include:

Smartphones:
* Front surface that isn't black.
* Overall shape that isn't rectangular, or doesn't have rounded corners.
* Display screens that aren't centered on the front face and have substantial lateral borders.
* Non-horizontal speaker slots.
* Front surfaces with substantial adornment.
* No front bezel at all.

Tablets:
* Overall shape that isn't rectangular, or doesn't have rounded corners.
* Thick frames rather than a thin rim around the front surface.
* Front surface that isn't entirely flat.
* Profiles that aren't thin.
* Cluttered appearance.

They also have a great depiction of what such a tablet may look like [phonearena.com]

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (5, Interesting)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253898)

What a bunch of horseshit. It would be come immediately clear how stupid those guidelines were if Apple ang Samsung were both car designers squabbling over a car model. I mean, you don't see Bentley [customwheels.ro] suing Chrysler. [chryforum.com]

When you're pimping a Chrysler, people know it's a Chrysler. Despite the similarities, there's no way in hell anybody with half a brain would confuse a Chrysler with a Bentley. And Bentley, being classy, is aware of that and that suing Chrysler would be a very tacky and un-classy move.

Apple could learn a few things from that little case study, but they want to be tacky and don't have enough faith in consumers to be able to distinguish the two.

Oh, I just clicked preview and saw that you're now at +5 funny and I've been trolled. I may be too dumb to get sarcasm, but I'm still not dumb enough to confuse a Galaxy with an iPad.

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (2)

alvinrod (889928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254166)

Maybe it's just me, but those two vehicles don't look similar. From a broad point of view, they might both be trying to convey the same ideas through their design, but they're different in so many individual aspects that I think it's a poor comparison for the point you're trying to make. Then again car analogies on Slashdot have never been good, so perhaps I'm judging too harshly.

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254420)

Maybe it's just me, but those two vehicles don't look similar.

Really? Not similiar? Hell, they're almost IDENTICAL! Both have windshields of clear glass trimmed with chrome.
Both have round steering wheels. Both have the driver's seat facing forward. They even both have four round wheels in diametrically opposite corners. I could go on and on...

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (5, Interesting)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254422)

That's because I was in a hurry and couldn't readily find a picture of an older, boxier Bentley. Here are the obvious similarities:

- The headlights are recessed from the Grille. Think of the center grille section as kind of a "nose" between the "eyes."
- The fender areas are tightly "wrapped" around the wheel wells and there is a small distance between the top of the wheel and the hood. Also note that both vehicles have big, spoked rims and small street-tires, all contributing to both models' "low-slung" appearance.
- On both vehicles, the angle of the front windshield is larger than the angle of the back windshield, and the roof itself is sloping downward toward the rear.
- Both vehicles are black with silver trim, and are generally intended to evoke a luxury appearance. Chrysler is obviously paying homage to Bentley.
- An obvious difference between the two pics I provided is that the Chrysler's grille extends to the bottom, and there are fog lights on its bumper. However, using this [automotivescycle.com] bentley pic as a reference, once again there is more similarity.
- While we're talking about the fronts, take into consideration the logos of the Bentley [gotbroken.com] and the Chrysler [gotbroken.com] here. Both logos are encapsulated in an oval, adorned with wings, and located on the top center of the grille.

I was saying earlier that Apple should appreciate that others are paying homage to them instead of trying to stop their shipments. It is apparent to anybody with half a brain which is which, especially when the GUIs are visible.

If Apple still wanted to stop Samsung, they could have at least compared the radius of the corners rather than just saying, "rounded corners," for example.

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254434)

It's just you. The chrysler 300 is widely regarded to be a bentley lookalike. There are even logo conversion kits out there people put on ther 300s.

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254756)

Only someone who has never seen a Bentley could possibly confuse the two. Samsung's own lawyer couldn't tell the difference.

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (1)

teh31337one (1590023) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254326)

These were actually some of the design options Apple said Samsung had to make their products more differentiated, and not infringe on their design products. While some of them are just crazy, others aren't too bad. Here's the original article: http://www.theverge.com/2011/12/2/2596527/apple-samsung-design-patent-iphone-ipad-work-around [theverge.com]

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254734)

Those are some great suggestions. Display screens that aren't centered. Cluttered appearance. Not so thin. If Apple actually suggested those changes in any official manner it is hard for me take anything else they say seriously.

Dumb (1)

infinite jester (206583) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254388)

...I'm still not dumb enough to confuse a Galaxy with an iPad.

Looks like you've got Samsung's lawyers beat, then: Even Samsung’s Lawyers Can’t Tell the Difference Between Its Tablet and an iPad [gizmodo.com]

Re:Dumb (5, Interesting)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254638)

Looks like you've got Samsung's lawyers beat, then: Even Samsungâ(TM)s Lawyers Can't Tell the Difference Between Its Tablet and an iPad [gizmodo.com]

You act like that's Samsung's problem.

I wonder if they (or Apple's lawyers) could tell this [androidauthority.com] apart from the front of the Galaxy Tab... because if not, Apple has a serious problem, because that's a Samsung Digital Photo Frame from 2006, predating the iPad by 4 years.

Now, the back looks nothing like a Galaxy Tab, but that's not likely to be the part the court was showing when asking the question.

Here's a tip: If you rip off someone's design, don't sue the person you ripped off for ripping off said design in a different product.

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254390)

DaimlerChrylser (Jeep) sued GM over the Hummer's 7-slot front grill design.

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (4, Insightful)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253904)

Basically the claim is that all phones and tablets after the iPhone and ipad must look nothing like the phones and tablets that existed prior to the iPhone and iPad. Apple has retroactive inventors rights.

Pity really, I like Apple products (other then iOS which is too restrictive for me) but they seem to have some crazy people working there these days.

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253938)

The people at Apple aren't the crazy ones. No, the crazy people are a) the legistlators who made the laws that Samsung is (supposedly) infringing on, and b) the judges who allow the laws to stand. In the US, at least, judges can invalidate laws if they find them bad enough (not sure how bad they have to be) and I imagine they can in other countries was well.

Apple is just using the system to get an advantage. Unfair, of course, but they don't care.

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (1)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254524)

Uh what tablets and phones looked and behaved like an iPhone/iPad before the two devices came out?

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (1)

JAlexoi (1085785) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253920)

Shape that isn't rectangular and cluttered appearance :-D Brillant!!!!

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (1, Insightful)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254028)

Shape that isn't rectangular and cluttered appearance :-D Brillant!!!!

Stupid you. Google for "sony tablet" or for "toshiba tablet" and you will find two nice tablet designs that are rectangular and look nothing like an iPad. If Sony and Toshiba can do it, then surely Samsung can do it.

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254148)

Shape that isn't rectangular and cluttered appearance :-D Brillant!!!!

Stupid you. Google for "sony tablet" or for "toshiba tablet" and you will find two nice tablet designs that are rectangular and look nothing like an iPad. If Sony and Toshiba can do it, then surely Samsung can do it.

Actually, the iPad also doesn't look all that much like whatApple filed in its design patent paperwork either.

But, anyway, many of the Toshiba tablets look similar to the iPad (because they iPad has a very generic design)

http://www.reviewphones.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/toshiba-thrive-tablet-vs-ipad-21.jpg

And here is one from Sony:

http://www.gayakuman.com/uploads/2010/02/sony-tablet.jpg

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (2)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254246)

Stupid you. Google for "sony tablet" or for "toshiba tablet" and you will find two nice tablet designs that are rectangular and look nothing like an iPad. If Sony and Toshiba can do it, then surely Samsung can do it.

I'll give you the SONY Tablet S - that's definitely quite different. At least, from the side. From the front it's just like most other tablets.

Which brings me to the "Toshiba Tablet". You're saying it looks "nothing like an iPad".
http://cdn.cbsi.com.au/story_media/339308309/toshiba-tablet-10-inch_12.jpg [cbsi.com.au]

Looks pretty similar to me. Yes, it's a different aspect ratio - but Apple has already demonstrated in court that aspect ratio alone is not enough of a differentiation.

You could say it's the sensors in the top right, or the buttons in the bottom... but the Galaxy S has much the same;
http://www.2-soft.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/iPad-vs-Galaxy-tab.jpg [2-soft.com]

And both also have that 'silver outline' along the edge of the case that Apple has also argued to be too similar to their designs.

If the Toshiba Honeycomb tablet is nothing like an iPad, then, imho, the Galaxy Tab is nothing like an iPad. Conversely, if the Galaxy Tab looks too much like an iPad, then so does the Toshiba Honeycomb.

That said, that's only regarding the visual look of the device, front-facing - while Apple's cases involve far more than just the aforementioned and includes things like icons, etc.
( Though I find most of their arguments there weak as well, it does all stack up. )

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253972)

I'm waiting for Apple to produce its 'bigger' iPhone and then for all the other manufacturers to use litigation to argue that Apple has copied them. They won't happen of course but the idea is no less absurd than the current wave of Apple litigation which is an attempt at restricting trade.

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253992)

I will be filing patents tomorrow for:

1) An electronic device who's case is made from black plastic.
2) An electronic device who's case is made from aluminum.
2) An electronic device in a rectangular case, with rounded corners.
3) An electronic device with an entirely flat screen.

Using these I will be able to sue every manufacturer of every laptop, tablet, smart phone, LCD display, and probably far more, and $$$PROFIT!!!

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254182)

I normally would assume you are kidding, but in this case I'm not sure. This is the perfect material for a satire, and there are certain authors (for some reason Phillip Roth comes to mind) who have made careers developing exactly this kind of humor. But I think you are serious -- but I'm just not sure. What a surreal world we live in!

What if Henry Ford had complained that other cars had four wheels, claiming that they had infringed on his patent, even though everyone knew that he didn't invent the idea of cars that have four wheels and it was all but impossible to imagine a car that didn't run on four wheels?

Square, black surfaces! I haven't a clue as to whether you are kidding or not, but I suppose that is the your point. At least I hope it is.

- Charlie

Re:Relevant: Apple gives Samsung advice on non-pat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254742)

the leapfrog design is infringing
it has rounded corners

fuck apple (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253762)

Fuck apple. Fuck steve nuclear jobs. Fuck apple lawyers. Fuck apple apologists. Fuck apple squares and rounds patents.

this is good for national security (4, Funny)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253796)

I don't want some muslims ripping off American technology and implementing a Muslim Caliphate. Did you know that in the Muslim World, women are raped if they drive a car? That young girls cannot go to school or their heads are cut off and fed to dogs?

This is what is at stake, when terrorist groups like Samsung attack our American values. We have to defend America first, and to hell with everyone else.

Re:this is good for national security (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253808)

holy shit, you're fucking nuts.

Re:this is good for national security (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253834)

I for one, think GP is spot on.

Also: Whoosh!

Re:this is good for national security (0)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253914)

You're worse than nuts. You're bug fucking crazy. Samsung selling a damned phone that resembles Apple's phone is going to cause more women to be raped? Bug fucking crazy.

appeasement! (5, Funny)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253940)

this is how Hitler was allowed to invade the Sudetenland, annex Austria, and crash those planes into the Trade Towers.

Re:appeasement! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253982)

Whatever you're smoking... I don't want any

Re:this is good for national security (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253958)

Cripes. This post reminds me about one on alt.sysadmin.recovery back in 2005 about some AOL-er saying, "Linux is an OS made by foreign terrorists to take money from real American companies like Microsoft."

Samsung is South Korea. Guys that have been our allies and manufacturing partners for decades. Definitely not terrorists.

Re:this is good for national security (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254136)

This is what's called "mods with no sense of humor at all. Nope."

--
BMO

thanks bmo (1)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254240)

im glad it half-way entertained one person

although it was over the top and completely irresponsible

Re:thanks bmo (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254316)

I took it as probably the way you meant it...

Making fun of the people who would agree with it.

--
BMO

They've created an Us and Them situation... (4, Insightful)

fostware (551290) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253816)

The worst part of these preliminary injunctions is they kill the biggest sales time - pre-Christmas.

While there may be merit on both sides, aborting the product in it's first large sales growth period is a sure-fire way of killing off a competitor.

What Apple has done, is polarise a significant portion of people against them. It's almost as if they modelled themselves on Microsoft...

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253966)

What Apple has done, is polarise a significant portion of people against them

Dorks who read slashdot are not "significant".

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (1)

fostware (551290) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254118)

Not all those that read /. live in their mum's basement.

My wife doesn't read /., but she's an S2 owner and routinely evangelises her Samsung compared to her 3GS. When it came time to upgrade, she didn't want to go for a 4 (4S wasn't out) and even before asking me about it (didn't want to risk a nerd rant - gee thanks!) she had spoken to quite a lot of people and played with their phones - and made her decision before talking to a slashdotter.

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (-1, Troll)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254540)

Comparing Apple to MS is laughably ignorant. Apple has revolutionized a myriad of industries and ushered in multiple eras of new computing paradigms. Just look at Samsung's (and everyone else's) tablets before the iPad or the state of the smartphone industry before the iPhone (Symbian? *shivers*). Android prototypes at the time were blackberry rip-offs.

Samsung eventually tried to develop their own OS, "bada", but as far as I can tell they haven't even bothered marketing it. They know it's completely inferior to anything Apple can come up with.

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (3, Insightful)

fostware (551290) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254762)

Microsoft has revolutionised computing in general bringing standard UIs to an industry with so many disparate hardware and software vendors, APIs, and technologies. You may dislike the interface, but it is a common standard through sheer numbers.
Apple does it with a handful of hand-picked "partners"

Microsoft has revolutionised collaboration internally with things such as OLE, DDE and Office, and externally with Exchange & Sharepoint.

Both companies have bought, lied, sued, or outright lifted others ideas to get ahead, and I despise what both have become, so I'd disagree with called ignorant.

(BTW I have admin certs with Microsoft, Apple, Red Hat, and Cisco - nevertheless I'll put the boot into any of those companies should they require it.)

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (-1, Redundant)

Dragonslicer (991472) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254778)

Apple has revolutionized a myriad of industries and ushered in multiple eras of new computing paradigms.

Bingo!

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254060)

Huh? Apple is still five years ahead of everyone else. Apple still has the only OS on smartphones that can be touted as 100% secure, with absolutely zero instances of malware in the wild going on. We hear about Android being compromised and pwned almost hourly.

So, this being the case, Apple is still the only game in town for tablets, and the only sensible game in town for smartphones. (Find actual games worth playing on Android except for 1-2 names... good luck.)

Oh, and Exchange support in Android still is nonexistant, so there is no way to use these devices in a business environment due to that, and no on device encryption.

Of course, the fact that the Java VM slurps half the CPU cycles in overhead forces Android devices to use far beefier CPUs and RAM stores than Apple devices.

Wake me up when Apple actually stops being a leader in the industry with at least 3-5 years between their devices and the leading competitor.

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254110)

Wow, you must live in some sort of Steve Jobs alternate world. iphones do indeed have malware, so does osx and any other os out there.

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254152)

Odd, we're using android phones with exchange at work with no issues, they are also locking them down pretty tight before a user touches them.

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (2, Funny)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254158)

So, this being the case, Apple is still the only game in town for tablets, and the only sensible game in town for smartphones.

I think Apple products are very nice, attractive and pretty well-made (with some notable exceptions). That being said, I have an important question to ask here:

Does loving Apple products too much make you stupid? Because I'm starting to get a little bit concerned. It seems to sort of go like this: First they get a MacBook, and they really like it. And then they get an iPhone and they really, really like it. Then they start smearing themselves with feces.

Am I wrong about this? Just scan the Anonymous Coward's comments in this article. They start right at the top and then they continue beneath any comment that criticizes Apple for this frivolous lawsuit against Samsung. Clearly it's the same person, and I'm pretty sure that wherever that AC is, he's smeared with feces.

Possibly not his own.

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254460)

that would be funny if it were not true

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (1)

erick99 (743982) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254216)

I'm not sure it could be demonstrated that Apple ". . is still five years ahead of everyone else." Five years is a great deal of time in the technology world.

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (2)

webnut77 (1326189) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254264)

Apple still has the only OS on smartphones that can be touted as 100% secure, with absolutely zero instances of malware in the wild going on.

Perhaps they should patent this and sue any other phone makers that are malware free.

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254716)

Time to wake up... this is years ahead of iOS, especially since iOS 5 is still 80% the same as iOS 1.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/27/windows-phone-7-5-mango-review/ [engadget.com]

Re:They've created an Us and Them situation... (1)

Waccoon (1186667) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254450)

What Apple has done, is polarise a significant portion of people against them. It's almost as if they modelled themselves on Microsoft...

With regards to this Christmas season, I doubt a significant portion of people even know Samsung makes a tablet, or that the Streisand Effect will kick in. Apple is still a media icon, and people don't even bother to check out what the competition has to offer.

Even today, just about every advertisement on the radio reminds you that they have an app "for your iPod or iPad". Hearing someone mention Android (at least) is a rare occasion. I assume non-tech magazines are in that same boat.

Son of a... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38253822)

Well, this explains the delay in the Galaxy Nexus from Verizon.

Damn you Apple! Now I can assure you I'll never buy one of your damn devices ever.

Apple knows Samsung is better... (5, Insightful)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38253878)

Apple is scared to death, because they know Samsung is making a better product.

Apple can control its sheeple users, but they have no right to control other companies or the right to block buyers from the competition.

When will Apple be called out for doing all the horrible shit people think Microsoft does?

Re:Apple knows Samsung is better... (3, Interesting)

erick99 (743982) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254234)

And, Apple has lost Steve Jobs and when his legacy of ideas is used up, I don't see Apple doing well. Apple has not done well in the past with Jobs and they won't in the future. Jobs was Apple. Jobs is gone. Apple will not continue to innovate and bring out "game changer" products because they lost the guy who envisioned those products and knew how to bring them to market.

Re:Apple knows Samsung is better... (1)

erick99 (743982) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254244)

should have read "Apple has not done well in the past WITHOUT Jobs . . ."

Re:Apple knows Samsung is better... (3, Insightful)

aeoo (568706) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254306)

When will Apple be called out for doing all the horrible shit people think Microsoft does?

I call them out all the time. But the problem is that ever since Apple adopted a Unix-y OS for its OS X, a large number of geeks have become fans and thereafter switched their brains entirely off. It's sad.

Re:Apple knows Samsung is better... (-1, Troll)

luther349 (645380) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254334)

with the lose of flash mobile ios is acully better then futer andoride devices can ever hope to be. unless the web quickly ops flash to html 5 whiten the next couple years. im not being a apple fan-boy hear but if you ever went to the android market its clutter with garbage ware and viruses its totally useless unless you know the app you want. vs itunes that has its share of crap-ware but nowhere near the level of andoride. i knoe people will say will its becouse apple controls it etc but when you look at the latter it seems to do more good then harm.

Re:Apple knows Samsung is better... (1)

erick99 (743982) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254456)

I have almost no idea what you are trying to say but I am sure you mean well.

Re:Apple knows Samsung is better... (4, Funny)

Bacon Bits (926911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254480)

Stop typing on an iPad touch screen and use something with a keyboard!

Re:Apple knows Samsung is better... (3, Funny)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254552)

Every time an autistic freetard calls millions of users "sheeple" I want to pull their tongue out of their body and strangle them to death with it.

Re:Apple knows Samsung is better... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254682)

honestly, have you ever encountered a apple user that isn't following the herd like all others ? Isn't apple by its strict product design creating users that are all forced to behave the same, without choice ? Haven't you noticed that by imposing weird apple-standards (firewire, airport, no USB, etc ... ) that it forces all apple-users to buy exotic conversion cables at premium prices, and that they DO buy them ?

Really, no sheepie behavior ? ... well then ... rip my tongue out and strangle me ..

Judge in an untenable position (0, Troll)

wisebabo (638845) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254104)

As a fellow Korean American, I'm wondering what kind of position she would've been under; with her husband (assuming he's also of Korean extraction), her relatives, classmates (if she was educated in Korea), and perhaps church (if she had been going to, as is often the case, a Korean church); if she had blocked Samsung.

Samsung is widely regarded (whether deserved or not) as a national treasure in Korea with a HUGE percentage of the ENTIRE ECONOMY (I think it's something crazy like 25%!). So I can guarantee that a decision against them would not be looked upon kindly by the average Korean.

Re:Judge in an untenable position (1)

alvinrod (889928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254200)

I think people are taking this ruling for more than it means. If you've read through the details of the ruling, the judge essentially says that it's likely that Samsung infringes on Apple's patents, but that it's unlikely that allowing Samsung to continue to sell their products will cause any significant damage to Apple, hence that there's no need for an injunction.

Even if an injunction were granted it wouldn't matter much. The ASUS Transformer Prime is dropping in a few weeks and it's superior in every way to Samsung's offering. It's unlikely that Samsung will see significant sales in the wake of a better product launching unless they decide to cut their prices. This lends even more credibility to the ruling in my opinion.

Re:Judge in an untenable position (1)

Rennt (582550) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254304)

If you've read through the details of the ruling, the judge essentially says that it's likely that Samsung infringes on Apple's patents, but that it's unlikely that allowing Samsung to continue to sell their products will cause any significant damage to Apple, hence that there's no need for an injunction.

Even better then that: In sum, the Court found that Samsung was successful in raising substantial questions as to the validity of Apple’s D’087 patent and that Apple was unable to persuade the Court that it would likely succeed at trial in its efforts to uphold the validity of said patent.

Re:Judge in an untenable position (1, Troll)

404 Clue Not Found (763556) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254290)

As a fellow Korean American, I'm wondering what kind of position she would've been under; with her husband (assuming he's also of Korean extraction), her relatives, classmates (if she was educated in Korea), and perhaps church (if she had been going to, as is often the case, a Korean church); if she had blocked Samsung.

Samsung is widely regarded (whether deserved or not) as a national treasure in Korea with a HUGE percentage of the ENTIRE ECONOMY (I think it's something crazy like 25%!). So I can guarantee that a decision against them would not be looked upon kindly by the average Korean.

And as a fellow American, it bothers me that an American judge of any descent would even consider supporting a foreign corporation out of left-over nationalism rather than uphold justice in her own country. She cannot be a fair interpreter of American law if she's beholden to Korean interests.

If this was an issue at all (I sure hope it wasn't), I can only hope the judge would've left the case to someone else.

Re:Judge in an untenable position (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254382)

also in recent news, samsung khan beats woongjin stars. Stork remains the world's best protoss, Zero is a queen.

Re:Judge in an untenable position (2)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254566)

And how exactly would she recuse herself? On the basis of being too prejudiced? Due to "racial discrimination"? Her career would be forever shot.

Re:Judge in an untenable position (1)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254322)

Those are words with strong implications.

You are essentially saying that the judge may have been under personal pressure to bias her findings. Which, if true, would imply that she should have recused herself from her duty in this case based on the determination that she could not act impartially.

I would think it's wise that Apple's legal team did not make any such remarks.

Re:Judge in an untenable position (4, Informative)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254338)

Her husband was born in Mexico and lives in the US since childhood, and she was raised in Mississippi and Oklahoma. And her mother is from North Korea, only the father is from South.

Re:Judge in an untenable position (0)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254558)

That's *exactly* what I was thinking. How fortuitous for Samsung to have acquired this judge. And how sad it would be politically incorrect for her to recuse herself on the basis of "racial discrimination".

The US Justice Dept (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254164)

Should investigate Apple for monopolistic practices, then they should split the company into multiple smaller ones like they wanted to do to MS.

Apple's OS business should be separated from its Hardware business. They should be forced to sell OSX and iOS to clone builders.

Re:The US Justice Dept (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254324)

What you're saying is that OS X and iOS are vastly superior to Windows, Linux, Android, etc. and it's not fair to limit them to Apple's hardware?

Re:The US Justice Dept (1)

luther349 (645380) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254424)

no they should not be forced to sell os to clones. apple it just one of many company's abusing ip patents. there all going threw giant patents wars. we need to fix the underlying problem of letting corporations patent ideas. a patent on hardware that is being made is one matter or a os that's being sold. cloning a ipod and trying to sell it as a apple device of course that should not be allowed. making something simler and not even-using the same os or name should be just fine as its always been this is how this fucking nation survives and also why jobs are dieing because everyone is scared to make anything in the usa anymore. its like gateway using ibm because they make different desktop pcs and the case happens to be the same style of course with different names printed on them and both machine are specked different and don't even run the same os and are not even advertised as being remotely simler. any sane court would toss the case. but it seems everyone has lost there minds.

Re:The US Justice Dept (1)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254574)

Why are you so stupid? Does it hurt when you think?

Only so many ways (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254294)

When I was in university, I had a CS assignment in an assembly language course. The prof. accused about 15 people in the class of plagiarism. I got 100% on the assignment, but wasn't one of the ones accused. The assignment was quite specific about expectations, and the code size was small (about 15 lines of code). The prof. openly accused one guy, and the guy asked: is there another way of writing this code and getting a correct result? The prof. stopped and thought for a minute, then said 'no', at which point he stopped. There are lots of ways of making a cell phone. Round corners isn't proprietary. Colorful icons aren't proprietary. Clicking once or twice isn't proprietary. Apple is hoping for a judicial monopoly, but developing a market doesn't mean you get an instant monopoly on that market.

Re:Only so many ways (1)

luther349 (645380) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254444)

thats the underlying problem people are panting these basic functions or ideas and tieing up the courts for years in hopes of getting easy money. and are goverment is allowing it to happon.

Re:Only so many ways (2)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 2 years ago | (#38254586)

Ah yes, the "it's obvious!" argument. Where were these obvious implementations before the iPad and iPhone? Why didn't anyone try something remotely similar? Why did Android convert from a Blackberry ripoff to an iOS clone 9 months after the iPhone's release?

Luxury (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38254510)

I am on the sidelines, therefore I have the luxury of conviction.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?