Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple told to rewrite "Samsung didn't copy", post on front page until Dec 14th

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 243 posts

Re: Apple told to rewrite "Samsung didn't copy", post on front page until Dec 14th

#221

Post by eridius »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #211
eridius wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? Your entire post was dismissing one of the features iOS introduced in the same breath as you talked about Android "outspec[cing]" iPhone. And yet you're claiming I'm trying to focus on specs, but you're trying to focus on "features", as if that's any different and better. Every time someone has tried to hype an Android phone in a discussion I've been a part of, all they do is throw out a bunch of buzzwords and a…

Are you a troll? Because all you did was just repeat yourself, nitpick something I didn't even say and ignore everything else. Go watch the 4.2 announce and note how every feature is about enhancing the experience and adding core features that iOS will probably not seen any, anytime soon. I mocked "Facebook integration" because it is mockable, that's what you're going to argue is "experience enhacning"? Android had i…

Ah, the old accusation of being a troll merely for disagreeing. Thanks for letting me know I can discount anything you say as you are not trying to argue in good faith.

Re: Apple told to rewrite "Samsung didn't copy", post on front page until Dec 14th

#222

Post by drivebyacct2 »

eridius wrote: post #221
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you a troll? Because all you did was just repeat yourself, nitpick something I didn't even say and ignore everything else. Go watch the 4.2 announce and note how every feature is about enhancing the experience and adding core features that iOS will probably not seen any, anytime soon. I mocked "Facebook integration" because it is mockable, that's what you're going to argue is "experience enhacning"? Android had i…

Ah, the old accusation of being a troll merely for disagreeing. Thanks for letting me know I can discount anything you say as you are not trying to argue in good faith.

>Ah, the old accusation of being a troll merely for disagreeing. Thanks for letting me know I can discount anything you say as you are not trying to argue in good faith.

Yes, ignore the other 4 paragraphs and then do the same thing you accused me of in the same sentence. You're a piece of work, have a good afternoon.

Re: Apple told to rewrite "Samsung didn't copy", post on front page until Dec 14th

#223

Post by jlgreco »

Groxx wrote: post #200
bitcartel wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right. Mr Cook has good reason to P45 (British pink slip) the UK legal team for their poor advice, but a fish rots from the head.

But gangrene frequently afflicts extremities. And fish heads are not often replaceable. Metaphors often (generally?) make poor arguments for why X does Y.

Perhaps a good expression is "A few bad Apple employees^W^Wapples spoil the barrel".

In other words, the decay started by a few will quickly rot an entire batch, if the good and the bad are kept together too long.

Re: Apple told to rewrite "Samsung didn't copy", post on front page until Dec 14th

#224

Post by YokoZar »

spullara wrote: post #164

Kind of ridiculous. Samsung obviously did copy, the court just ruled that it didn't merit an infringement ruling. I mean, does anyone think, really, that Samsung didn't set out to copy all of Apple's products? Wouldn't it be better for all (except Apple) if it was spelled out that Samsung copied them but it is ok?

Not even the American jury thought that Samsung violated Apple's patent on the product in question.

Re: Apple told to rewrite "Samsung didn't copy", post on front page until Dec 14th

#225

Post by czhiddy »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #219
taligent wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple was doing 3D panoramas in 1993. It really isn't that impressive.

Oh give me a break. Microsoft was doing tablets in 1999. It really isn't that impressive. Hell, that's a better argument because those tablets were actually usable. It's not like Apple had a consumer product at that time that did that. You do realize I'm talking about taking the panoramas, not just displaying them in Quicktime, right?

Welcome to 2008? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynth

Re: Apple told to rewrite "Samsung didn't copy", post on front page until Dec 14th

#227

Post by mung »

jivatmanx wrote: post #69
cageface wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This episode is the childish and vindictive zenith of an amazing year of childish and vindictive behavior from Apple. Frankly I just don't get it. They make fantastic hardware and their software is usually at least good. Why do they have to lash out like a schoolyard bully at anybody that threatens to put the tiniest dent in their giant pile of cash money? Why can't they let their products sell and speak for themselv…

Not to mention that the original Macintosh GUI was a blatant copy of Xerox PARC, created after Jobs and a team of developers visited the PARC research lab. I don't blame them for this because I simply don't believe any design patents are legitimate, but the hypocrisy is astounding.

Yet Xerox PARC is still sitting in a basement.

Re: Apple told to rewrite "Samsung didn't copy", post on front page until Dec 14th

#228

Post by belorn »

appleflaxen wrote: post #71
belorn wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Annoying a judge is a really bad idea. The court system is normally quite free from corruption, but all that goes out off the window when it become personal and political. See the pirate bay court case, or just any of the police brutality cases. If Apple is going all out with lawyers and legal prowness, instead of competiting with products, they need to get better at it.

Can you give an example of the police brutality cases you had in mind? I'd be interested to ready more about the social dynamic with the judge, if you can point me in the right direction.

A blogpost at rickfalkvinge.se recently talked about a few of those cases (site down for the moment). In particular, I was referring to the Ian Tomlinson case, but there have been similar events in Sweden and elsewhere.

I have yet to hear a police brutality case where an coverup was fully prosecuted to the point where all police officer involved (and who did nothing) was sentenced. It just do not happen. By the time it gets out, it has become personal and political.

Re: Apple told to rewrite "Samsung didn't copy", post on front page until Dec 14th

#229

Post by drivebyacct2 »

czhiddy wrote: post #225
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh give me a break. Microsoft was doing tablets in 1999. It really isn't that impressive. Hell, that's a better argument because those tablets were actually usable. It's not like Apple had a consumer product at that time that did that. You do realize I'm talking about taking the panoramas, not just displaying them in Quicktime, right?

Welcome to 2008? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynth

Which is again not consumer based hand-held 360 degree panoramas? And jesus, we're talking about the experience of having it a phone. How far do we have to stretch this to try to discount ONE feature added to 4.2?

If we want to play this game, I remember my dad finding some trial-ware when I was a kid and we took a few photos and were able to stitch them, I had to have been in middle school. yikes, 8-10 years ago, anyway, my point wasn't that it's the first time a real human being has been able to take two photos and stick them together.

Re: Apple told to rewrite "Samsung didn't copy", post on front page until Dec 14th

#230

Post by confluence »

It's not like it even matters. Apple is dead, and these are just their final gasps of air.

Apple is pulling the Edison maneuver to protect their rapidly dwindling monopoly on mobile consumer hardware - and they will lose because Tesla (aka Android) is better for both the industry and consumers.

Android is open, Android is iOS equivalent, Android is cheap, Android is backed by the rest of the world's electronic mobile manufacturers. Apple can't win - the world is now chasing their profits with ravenous rage and hundreds of billions of dollars in invested capital. They will be commoditized because all they sell, and all they have ever sold, was glass with a grey backs. The only thing that protected Apple - really protected them was iOS. Those apps made Apple. And the openness of Android will commoditize them.

Apple can shock elephants (ban tablets) and write false accusations about the merits of AC (Samsung sucks) all they want - it doesn't change the fact that their monopoly in mobile hardware is in a terminal and rapid death spiral.

Samsung made Apple. And Samsung will destroy them for the fundamental reason that style can and will be copied vociferously for the betterment of the consumer, but the substance behind it cannot.

Glass with grey backs are commodity. Market saturation is imminent. Competitive equivalence has occured.

Post reply on HN