Google Comments on the $1 Billion Apple, Samsung Verdict

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]filmman03[/nom]+1 absinthe im trying to understand your point; but i cannot sit here and believe that Apple has actually "innovated" anything. if you are correct in what you say; then it would mean all of us who mod our cars or computers are technically innovating that stuff. Apple takes something that was successful or not; changes stuff... and what I mean by that is adding parts from other manufacturers paired w/ the iOS, again Unix, and call it "innovation" just doesn't add up. It especially doesn't add up when other companies like Samsung, Google, Motorolla, etc take Apple's base, the iPhone, and change everything to "innovate" it.... but then Apple calls them out and says that isn't allowed b/c of some bogus patents. o and not to mention the name "iphone" was taken from another company, but did apple get permission to use it? no.[/citation]


Okay. The first person to create a radial tachometer invented the tachometer. The first person to put it in their car is an innovator, even though they didn't invent it. They took something that existed, and did something with it that was better than what came before.

Now, if you see that guy that put the radial tachometer in his car and you also put a radial tachometer in your car, but you choose a blue one, you are neither an inventor or innovator. You simply copied. If you see the guy that put the radial tachometer in his car and you put a digital tachometer in your car, and mount it flush with the other readouts, you are an innovator. You didn't invent the tachometer, but you did something with the idea that was different and better than before.

Now let's look at the iPad as an example. Not the first tablet computer. However, the first tablet computers were heavy, had short battery life, were single touch and used desktop operating systems that made them difficult to use.
Apple took the idea of the tablet computer (did not invent it) made it thinner/lighter, added multi-touch capabilities, gave it longer battery life and developed an operating system specifically for a multi-touch screen mobile device.

They took something that was not well engineered and they added things that made it user friendly. They vastly improved on a previous idea so much that it was an instant success. That is innovation.

Now, Samsung comes along, and they take the idea of a tablet that is very iPad like, except they don't add anything innovative to it. It has the same features as an iPad. It has differences. Different operating system, different look, etc, but there's nothing *new.* They did not add anything of value. That is not innovation, that is copying.

Pre iPad tablets -> iPad (Huge jump in added features and usability)
iPad -> Samsung tablet (No jump in added features or usability)
 
[citation][nom]filmman03[/nom]+1 absinthe im trying to understand your point; but i cannot sit here and believe that Apple has actually "innovated" anything. if you are correct in what you say; then it would mean all of us who mod our cars or computers are technically innovating that stuff. Apple takes something that was successful or not; changes stuff... and what I mean by that is adding parts from other manufacturers paired w/ the iOS, again Unix, and call it "innovation" just doesn't add up. It especially doesn't add up when other companies like Samsung, Google, Motorolla, etc take Apple's base, the iPhone, and change everything to "innovate" it.... but then Apple calls them out and says that isn't allowed b/c of some bogus patents. o and not to mention the name "iphone" was taken from another company, but did apple get permission to use it? no.[/citation]

Also, Mac OS 1.0 came out a year before Amiga Workbench.

"iPhone" was a trademark of Cisco, but they patented that name 2 years after Apple's iPhone had been in development. There were also several other companies using the name at the time.
 
[citation][nom]filmman03[/nom]lol yes i am not going to dig up crap from the 80's and 90's to disprove you....my Sandisk MP3 player was 8GB of flash based storage that not only would allow the playback of MUSIC but ALSO VIDEO which at the time that Apple released the original BLACK AND WHITE iPOD it could NOT play video. point being; Apple took a successful market, portable music and attempted to perfect it but they DID NOT perfect it as there have been many many many variations of the iPod. in other words; Apple needs to continue to re-do their crap every year. and apparently that is "innovation"?Apple did what they still do today; the take what ppl have built and attempt to re-work it by adding in crap they didnt create and call it "innovation" even if it complete shit. as evidenced w/ the original Mac's. While they may have had mouse support.... what was the point of it at the time? an 8-bit GUI was awesome at the time however the functionality of Windows was far superior.... Do you wonder why Apple stopped using its own Mac OS design and adopted Unix as their basis? B/c they can't compete w/ Windows. So they take a completely open source kernel and create OSX and make it closed just like ALL of their crap.[/citation]

Care to look up when that Sandisk flash player came out? You're comparing something far more recent to the iPod that came out 11 years ago.

Mac OS made have had mouse support but what was the point of it at the time? To advance usability.

Apple switched to a Unix core because Steve Jobs had been running NeXT before his return to Apple, where they had developed an operating system called NeXTSTEP which was based on Mach and BSD. Upon his return to Apple the technologies created at NeXT were used in the next iteration of OS X.
Also, OS X is mostly still open source.

Do some research.
 
[citation][nom]theabsinthehare[/nom]Also, Mac OS 1.0 came out a year before Amiga Workbench."iPhone" was a trademark of Cisco, but they patented that name 2 years after Apple's iPhone had been in development. There were also several other companies using the name at the time.[/citation]
The Mac OS did came one year earlier than the AmigaOS. Earlier asked for "How about a successful desktop OS with mouse support before Mac OS? A mainstream window based GUI before Mac OS?" like proof the Mac OS was a innovation, when both the original Macintosh and Mac OS were far from being hits. The AmigaOS on the other hand was, it also introduced quite a few things, hence it was an innovation. Unlike the Macintosh that was a ripoff of the Xerox Star 8010, the only innovations was that it was cheaper and had a more pleasing shape.
 
[citation][nom]tmshdw2[/nom]Some of guys should remove your heads out of the sand and look at the evidence that was used.The evidence included Goggle communicating with Samsung some time ago asking Samsung to stop copying Apple.The samsung iii (or whatever) is a near exact oversized copy of the iPhone 3GS. Dunno what you guys are defending on Samsung's side. Stop being droid heads. This was a correct rulling.[/citation]

That kinda depends on how you look at it. We will see how this stands in the appeals courts which it will very likely go through.

Additionally, litigation on the same issues in other countries have swung different ways, so clearly its not an open/shut case.

Lastly, in any trial, where a jury makes a decision on multiple items, and awards a single payout the appeals process will likely overturn 1/2 and cut that payout down drastically. Plus, Apple just sued the company the makes all their parts for the iphone/ipad. Samsung produces the majority of the equipment. So Samsung will likely just hike the hardware costs and get that billion back over the next 3 years at the consumers cost.
 
I'd pmsl if Samsung make up the billion dollars by charging apple more to purchase the materials they need to make their god awful products. They can call it the crapple manufacturing tax.
 
[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]The Mac OS did came one year earlier than the AmigaOS. Earlier asked for "How about a successful desktop OS with mouse support before Mac OS? A mainstream window based GUI before Mac OS?" like proof the Mac OS was a innovation, when both the original Macintosh and Mac OS were far from being hits. The AmigaOS on the other hand was, it also introduced quite a few things, hence it was an innovation. Unlike the Macintosh that was a ripoff of the Xerox Star 8010, the only innovations was that it was cheaper and had a more pleasing shape.[/citation]

The first Flash Based mass produced media player was released in April 1998 (SaeHan/Eiger MPMan), the first iPod was released in October 2001, 3 years later. Between the MPMan release and the iPod, there were 5 other media players that were released by different companies, several had a top display with a circular control interface below it just like the later ipod. What made the ipod unique was not the fact that it was an mp3 player, it was iTunes the music distribution platform. The ipod itself is not overly innovative, when it was released there were similar form factor devices and devices with touch interfaces and LCD's.

The first media player with a color screen was released by Archos in 2002 that could play video, the first iPod that supported video was released in 2005 about 3 years later. Again between these released numerous devices were released by other companies. In fact it could be said that ipod's dominance in the mp3 space due to itunes was pushing those other manufacturers to innovate towards video, they again didn't see the writing on the wall, it was itunes that made the ipod and later iphone/ipad a powerhouse in the industry because it was not about the hardware, its about the content distribution.

I am the first to stick my tongue out at Apple for saying they are so innovative when it comes to hardware. I mean come on, they have basically given up on innovation in the PC space .. they dropped their own custom hardware and software. Old Mac's used to be top of the line hardware, SCSI interfaces, fast bus speeds, RISC processors, running a custom OS. Now they are under the hood like any other PC with the exception for a few custom hookups and new ports ever once in a while. Their OS is a modified FreeBSD, another free linux OS that basically someone else wrote and they just tacked a UI on top of and a few subsystems to make it work. The one and only thing that Apple has truely been innovative about in the last 15 years is iTunes. A connected content distribution model for music, video and applications. This is the genius that has turned them into a 650 billion dollar company.

The irony is, that if Microsoft never bailed them out in the 90's ($350 million or something like that) and released Office / IE for their platform, and if iTunes had never been released for windows, Apple wouldn't even be around today they would have folded. iTunes was the keystone to their success.

So it makes me wonder, if Apple tomorrow added Android App sales to the iTunes market place, and released ported versions of its interfaces as apps for the Android platform. They could have iTunes distributing to all 200 million + phones that the industry has released. Apple would just make money hand over fist and wouldn't even need to fight any fights, they would just win on all fronts where it counts ... with the $$$
 
Apple is not as innovative as the iSheep might have one believe but Apple has contributed a fair amount. However, as has been stated, all this law-suit crap really detracts from their brand. Can you imagine Mercedes suing Hyundai because Hyundai copied Mercedes' designs...which, if you follow the industry, you know is true. No, Mercedes doesn't and doesn't need to acknowledge Hyundai's existence.

Apple could learn from this. ...though tbf, Samsung is more significant than Hyundai in my example.
 
[citation][nom]EDVINASM[/nom]Apple battles with Samsung are laughable. I said it before and will say it again - if we had same patent wars in auto industry we would be still driving good old Ford. Thanks to innovation through competition we have weak players out and strong ones showing up how it's done. If Apple for once tried to be innovative without being a bully we would see some pretty shocking increase in innovations curve.I know Samsung is a bit of a copycat firm but boy do they bring nice and reliable devices. For that I respect them. Long live Samsung.[/citation]

Everybody copies ideas. That's how the good ones bubble up to the top. Nobody in the industry has made a completely original product that borrows nothing from what came before it. So yes, they copied. Apple copied. Everybody copies ideas. As long as you still do your own engineering, using the best ideas and offering a better product is what capitalism is all about.
 
Meh... Never bought an apple phone. Never will. I just do not trust all their proprietary crap. For me it is an inherently flawed system that can only be kept afloat by yuppie fever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.