Apple vs Samsung: Be Careful What You Wish For

[reggie]

Re: Apple vs Samsung: Be Careful What You Wish For

Whats the point? The Chinese will just copy it anyway.

Yes, and that's anothe great reason to dump GATT.

[srivatsan]

Re: Apple vs Samsung: Be Careful What You Wish For

http://bottomline.nbcnews.com/_news/...d-verdict?lite

slap on the wrist of both ?

[jk]

Re: Apple vs Samsung: Be Careful What You Wish For

http://bottomline.nbcnews.com/_news/...d-verdict?lite

slap on the wrist of both ?

$1billion is more than slap on the wrist, if it withstands the inevitable appeals.
meanwhile, apple has patented the rectangle.

[doom&gloom]

Re: Apple vs Samsung: Be Careful What You Wish For

funny how a US jury sides with a US company, no?

some of these software patents are just so absurd they should be invalidated.

[Milton Kuo]

Re: Apple vs Samsung: Be Careful What You Wish For

funny how a US jury sides with a US company, no?

some of these software patents are just so absurd they should be invalidated.

I have yet to see a software or business process patent that I felt deserved patent protection.

[don]

Re: Apple vs Samsung: Be Careful What You Wish For

apparently they were 'careful' enough. note the San Jose venue . . .

[CanuckinTX]

Re: Apple vs Samsung: Be Careful What You Wish For

One thing this case reminded me of was a trip to So Korea back in 2002. What struck me as crazy was that so many of their vehicles looked exactly like a BMW or Mercedes, yet were a Korean brand. I rarely saw an actual import car but I was shocked how blatantly they ripped off the German designs. Granted, these were cars that we didn't have in North America and probably weren't sold anywhere else in the world, but still it was just obvious to anyone that knew cars what they were copying. Maybe ripping off the design of a competitor isn't a big thing in So Korea.

[DRumsfeld2000]

Re: Apple vs Samsung: Be Careful What You Wish For

The reason why Apple is so successful is because humans are so dumb. Most buy these expensive gadgets because they are ''hip or cool'', but they are just following the crowd. They probably use less than 10% of the gadgets capabilty. On top of that they then have to buy the expensive ''apps''. I nearly bought an Apple computer, but then I looked at the apps and said no way. I saved a lot of money and doubt if I have lost anything by not buying an Apple.

[c1ue]

Re: Apple vs Samsung: Be Careful What You Wish For

$1billion is more than slap on the wrist, if it withstands the inevitable appeals.

Yes and no. $1 billion is not even 1 year's profits on smartphones by Samsung.

Cheap at the price...if you're big enough. I also wonder if Samsung will 'claw back' some of this since a significant chunk of iPhone/iPad contents are actually made by Samsung.

[LorenS]

Re: Apple vs Samsung: Be Careful What You Wish For

Apple is not very innovative. They merely need patents to be able to sell their collection of well integrated pieces.

When I bought an Apple computer I knew I was buying nothing particularly novel -- except for one thing. An Apple computer worked and Apple accessories would work when plugged in correctly and Apple software was likewise going to work.

When I shifted over the the equally un innovative IBM platform I was going for a cheaper collection of pieces that worked well enough, but not seamlessly. I valued the lower initial cost and the diversity of options over the ease of use Apple presented.

Meanwhile, Microsoft managed to bundle an easy to use OS (burdened by huge processor load) and myriad vendors provided countless cheap or free tools. So that, in my mind, the PC platform is nearly as plug and play "easy" as my Apple was, and far cheaper.

This patent stuff is almost entirely BS. Apple sells an image (I even had an Apple sticker on my car) and an integrated package. That's their value proposition. Their "innovation" is largely getting multiple "things" to work together so their customer doesn't have to. Mostly, the things they are bundling together have been invented by someone else. Even the "plug" on an iPod while "proprietary" is nothing more than a small bundle of connectors arranged in a somewhat novel manner. The value of the iPod plug architecture is virtually zero, the value of the iPod plug ubiquity is huge. Apple got there by brute force, however the USB plug is even more universal and arrived at it's place via cooperation. As a game changer the USB standard beats Apple's iPod interface hands down.

I haven't purchased an Apple product since my 68020 based Mac Book. Even then I ended up buying "Soft PC" so that I could run PC software on my Mac (before that I had an 8086 plugin card for my IIe). I have never felt the need to buy an apple emulator for my PC based machines.

[flintlock]

Re: Apple vs Samsung: Be Careful What You Wish For

One thing this case reminded me of was a trip to So Korea back in 2002. What struck me as crazy was that so many of their vehicles looked exactly like a BMW or Mercedes, yet were a Korean brand. I rarely saw an actual import car but I was shocked how blatantly they ripped off the German designs. Granted, these were cars that we didn't have in North America and probably weren't sold anywhere else in the world, but still it was just obvious to anyone that knew cars what they were copying. Maybe ripping off the design of a competitor isn't a big thing in So Korea.

The British show Top Gear had an episode about similar auto rip-offs in China. Even used similar sounding names for the cars. Pretty funny. Perhaps the cars in Korea where bought from China?