41–50 of 260 posts
This, and inevitable references to Braun, have no place in comparison with the Samsung trial. Samsung made competing products so similar to the effect, and indeed with the purpose, of confusing consumers. The recent rise in Apple bashing and calls of hypocrisy is even stranger in historical context[1]. Perhaps more of us should try and empathize with Apple's situation and history before passing fashionable judgement.…
No, no, no you guys don't understand. This is not a cheap rip-off. It's an homage and the Swiss will be honoured that their famous clock has been elevated to the high-art status of Apple design and innovation. The critical eye of an average iPhone user will appreciate the fine craftsmanship & precision of the painstaking work that went into translating the iconic clock into an exact digital replica.
I can't downvote you. But I think that this is a prime example of the snarky comments that people are complaining about that are hurting HN's comment quality.
They also copied the look of Braun's classic calculator and tape deck designs for their calculator and podcasts apps. Is this particular instance copying? Yes. Will it affect the popularity of said designs in a positive manner? Probably. Will they sell more of their $400 clock (see: http://www.momastore.org/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDi... ) as a result? I'd guess at yes. So, in any case, they sell more clocks,…
Did Apple think they would get away with copying one of the most iconic clock designs ever without anyone noticing? I am speechless. Are cracks starting to show in a post-Jobs Apple too big to fix? I don't want to bash them, but this is blatant and unlicensed copying at its best. Kind of ironic given the recent events with Samsung.
They also copied the look of Braun's classic calculator and tape deck designs for their calculator and podcasts apps. Is this particular instance copying? Yes. Will it affect the popularity of said designs in a positive manner? Probably. Will they sell more of their $400 clock (see: http://www.momastore.org/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDi... ) as a result? I'd guess at yes. So, in any case, they sell more clocks,…
Are you out of your mind?
What's with the sycophantic comments all over this story excusing Apple's terrible behavior?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Serious question, if the Railway company was a government institution when the design was released, is the design not in the public domain? Nowadays, it seems they're quasi-governmental, but back then I think they were strictly a national org. It'd be like DARPA trying to get royalties on the internet or something similar. I could be wrong in this line of thinking, of course.
Government entities can and often do own intellectual property - patents, trademarks, copyrights - and regularly defend them. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Love_New_York for one famous example.
So, while you are right about the ability of a gov to register and/or patent things, I'm surprised they'd be willing to follow through. It's not as though Apple is trying to make money off of them by selling a knock off product or piggybacking on an advert campaign.
Good point none the less and thanks for the explanation.
I'm as hopeful that Apple gets served its own medicine like the next guy, but this seems more like a common sense design rather than a copy. In fact, I once made a mechanical clock that looks virtually identical to the iOS example and this was years before iOS was unleashed on the world. It's just thick lines and thin lines thrown together. The hands aren't even tapered like the Mondaine's. This seems like a desperat…
It's the red circle on the second hand that clinches it. It's not identical though, the minute markers are thinner, and the minute hand doesn't reach all the way to the rim. That said, how many way are there already to design a clock?
So yeah, blatant rip. For folks pointing out the Braun parallels, it's important to remember that Braun never made an iPod. Apple transposed design cues from one long-since discontinued product to a different product in a different time. It was an inspired move and I applaud them for it.
With this clock, they're transposing nothing, they're adding nothing, they're improving nothing. This is just unlicensed copying. It's a credit to their good taste, perhaps, but not their sense of ethics.
No, no, no you guys don't understand. This is not a cheap rip-off. It's an homage and the Swiss will be honoured that their famous clock has been elevated to the high-art status of Apple design and innovation. The critical eye of an average iPhone user will appreciate the fine craftsmanship & precision of the painstaking work that went into translating the iconic clock into an exact digital replica.
I can't downvote you. But I think that this is a prime example of the snarky comments that people are complaining about that are hurting HN's comment quality.
And truthfully, seeing it in ios, I must say I kinda like it, even though its obviously ripped off and the anit-apply-fanboy in me wants to see blood
This, and inevitable references to Braun, have no place in comparison with the Samsung trial. Samsung made competing products so similar to the effect, and indeed with the purpose, of confusing consumers. The recent rise in Apple bashing and calls of hypocrisy is even stranger in historical context[1]. Perhaps more of us should try and empathize with Apple's situation and history before passing fashionable judgement.…
Jesus. Is this a troll post, or are you being serious?