OSNews

You should have read the articles here. A similar Tablet was already presented 17 years ago.
Apple was never very innovative, not in design and not in technical specs, they just know better how to do their marketing, that is until now . . . . .

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2011/08/users-treat-criticism-o...

Interesting. I admit I've been guilty of this.

I disagree. This kind of aggression and ruthlessness makes me admire Apple from a purely capitalist point of view. I wish I had shares in this company

It's funny how long it took someone to notice such an obvious falsification. "

Last I checked falsifying evidence is very big no no in any court in the world. How can you admire a company that uses clearly unmoral and unethical tactic's to get an edge. Its only thing to do it and not get busted but when you do it in a court filing that is a can of worms Apple shouldn't of opened. I'm no lawyer but Samsung seems to have legal ground to sue for least 3 weeks of lost sales over this.

If Germany is anything like Australia a few senior Apple executives will be serving prison time for perjury and their lawyers will be disbarred.

It would be awesome if this happened. A big win for fair competition in my opinion.

Sadly I can't see it happening

You admire liars and crooks? What does it have to do with "capitalist point of view"? It has something to do with crooked point of view.

And that's why the self-regulating free market is a pipe dream.

In a ideal self-regulating free market, not even patents would exist at all, let alone a aberration like this community design thing that Apple are trying to exploit.

Hardcore liberals see court appeals between companies as a government intervention (in short, a company trying to leverage the power of the state in his favor against a competitor), since the judiciary system is a integral part of the state. For them, the sole legal limit that a corporation should have is the plain criminal law, to avoid competitors to kill each other if something went awry, for example. :-)

In theory the ideal communist state works well too.

the communists accepted their failure after the first crash
the capitalists produce one crash after another and don't learn from it

i don't want communism back, but i think we should have abandomed capitalism a long time ago

This is not Capitalism.
It's as government-driven as it gets.

In capitalism (whether its a personal attitude or a political system), everything is settled by the parties involved only- and if they make or lose money or customers fighting each other by producing competitive products- Well, so it is. That's it. There's no court playing third-party (even if you looked for one). There are no patent rights. There is only limited scope for copyright. No one will hear your claims over code, science, hardware arrangements etc. You are responsible for people knowing what ideas are attributable to you.
There MIGHT be a provision for highly unique designs as art. But even art does not really have protection. Art, too, works like a market. If you get copied, you get copied.
You fight with your products to win. Make alliances with other companies if necessary- make the right choices.
The government is small or even almost non-existent - and simply for non-intrusive, contract-based administration of public services- which does not have any true money of its own- because it does not tax companies or people.
This is capitalism in the form people who talk about it mean.
I don't know when "Capitalism" became interchangeable with "Mixed economy", "Hedonism/Nihilism" and "Pragmatism", those words have been named especially to reflect that they are completely different ideas.

What we have here is absolutely nothing like that.
What I do admire, or rather what fascinates me, is the mad pragmatism of the company. (I think you mean this, too)

It takes some serious ego and guts to do stuff like this- and I've got out the popcorn and I'm waiting (or hoping, is it? ) for someone who will match them madness. I'd love a good show.

Yup, under 'pure' capitalism, companies wouldn't be taking each other to court over patent issues, because patents (and other forms of intellectual property) constitute government interference in the market.

Pure capitalism isn't much more desirable than pure socialism, but anyone who blames it for the current system understand what capitalism actually is.

Don't give them ideas. Apple may become a religion and become tax exempt. They already have enough brain-washed followers.

So they haven't yet become one!?!?!?! Shocking!!!

Because it isn't news. Just some nutcase complaining that Google didn't pay enough for Motorola.

Because nobody submitted it.

In fact, why are you even posting it here when it's not even the slightest bit relevant to this article?

You can see the list of pending submissions, without being an editor, in this place : http://www.osnews.com/submit

One can only hope

hmmm ... highly doubtful ... most people are actually not in the slightest interested in the legal wranglings of companies whose products they buy ... I think it is usually more people technically interested (as those frequenting sites like OSNews) that would care ... but on the larger scale this will blow over most people's heads ...

"Apple is Doomed", eh?

That's the sad part, the Galaxy tab is no yet comparable to the iPad2, the iPad2 feels more responsive and smooth, and the applications are better, but the Galaxy Tab has flash, so that's a plus for some.

It's in Apple's interest to go after potential competitors before they have enough money to bankroll a defense.

It's plain easier to drag defenseless people through the courts. (Yes I'm being cynnical here).

Edited 2011-08-19 16:18 UTC

I think you may find Samsung a larger company than Apple

Samsung Revenue 2010 - $ 205.9 billion
Apple Revenue 2010 - $ 65.23 billion

... (not that I agree with what Apple did, just your argument does not hold)

Between Samsung and Googorola (that sounds like some kaiju name from a Godzilla movie, but I digress), Apple is starting to upset a lot of powerful people. The funny part is, they're the only ones who are getting mad about it. Google tells their own employees that they need to use either Linux or a Mac for their office desktops. I wonder how long that will last with Apple continuing to attack everyone remotely related to smartphones or tablets.

Not so, my Nephew is a Lead Dev at Google, all he uses is MS Windows

What was this stuff about then ?

http://www.tuaw.com/2010/05/31/google-to-employees-mac-or-linux-but...
http://arstechnica.com/security/news/2010/06/mac-os-x-and-linux-are...

Edited 2011-08-20 17:03 UTC

Well... Obviously Windows devs need to have Windows installed. It's over-hyped, because they probably have Linux/Mac as the preferred option, rather than mandatory.

Why Apple chose to attack Samsung in particular totally eludes me. Samsung doesn't even need their phone or tablet businesses to prosper.

However if this backfires eg the courts set a precedent weakening design protection Apple will be in dire trouble.

You just came up with a new reason: Samsung might be willing to back down if things get bad enough, or at least dump Android for something more... original.

The other reason is that Samsung is the Android vendor responsible for the closest copies, from the minimalist design and packaging to the look of the icons. Which also means that, regarding the rest of your comment:



if Apple loses against Samsung, they'll know they have no rights against the less severe imitators, and it's time to move on.

They could have tried going against some of the more brazen Chinese counterfeits of past years to test the waters first and get some legal momentum, but there are a few problems with that. For one, there's just no point -- fake iPods weren't made by legitimate companies and never sold in serious numbers -- and for two, it might backfire: if they outright failed, the entire world would know that design protections are utterly unenforceable, and if they won, the precedent might not be helpful. When judges look at precedent, they hone in on the differences between the preceding and current cases, and they might get hung up on how much Samsung isn't a counterfeiter rather than how much they are an imitator.

So in short, Samsung, now, makes a lot of sense as a target.

My eyes must be really well adjusted to PC level of smoothness...
Because iPad2 does not feel right, though in a different way than Android. iOS feels like having a smudging lag, while Android feels like having a jerking lag. WP7 feels somehow better...

Games, however, are a different area. And app responsiveness? No, pretty much depends on the app...

My guess is, Apple views competing tablets and smart phones as an interference to their iCloud plans, which depends on people using their products. Then there is the matter of Apple's 30% cut from developers and businesses using Apple's app stores.

As soon as the devices are physically presented to the court the Apple case will collapse. This can only be a futile delaying tactic at best.

Did you bother to read my post?

The German judge not only saw the device he handled both devices and on the basis of that he decided to issue an injunction.

So, in fact, seeing the two devices convinced him that Apple would likely win the case!

Edited 2011-08-20 02:50 UTC

He was probably some doddering old fool who didn't even own a phone.

That's what I was thinking too. The guy is probably completely unaware the that the iPad is the spitting image of the Knight Ridder, or that companies in the industry routinely copy each other's ideas or that Apple devices are polished up versions of other companies devices. In short, he takes a quick glance at the two devices and says, "Holy crap, these things look alike" without any real basis for an injunction.

Samsung need to take the judge down to a phone shop or computer store to see how very similar many products are. In many cases you can only really tell the difference by reading the makers brand on the case.