Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 9th Aug 2012 21:38 UTC
Windows "Here's the official guidance, my sources say: Anything currently/formerly known as a 'Metro-Style application' (with or without a hyphen) will now be known officially as a 'Windows 8 application'. References to the 'Metro user interface' will now be replaced by "Windows 8 user interface." And instead of saying 'Metro design', the Softies and those adhering to their official guidelines will be using the words 'Windows 8 design'." Microsoft not being allowed to use the Metro name here is just as ridiculous as Apple trolling Samsung. All ridiculous exponents of the western world's IP fetish.
Thread beginning with comment 530612
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Respond
by Tony Swash on Fri 10th Aug 2012 19:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Respond"
Tony Swash
Member since:
2009-08-22

Yes... but on the front page is also:

"Microsoft not being allowed to use the Metro name here is just as ridiculous as Apple trolling Samsung."

If Samsung indeed copied the iPhone, like Apple claims and their own document kind of proves, how can Apple's actions still be described as ridiculous and trolling?



Quite.

Thom says he said what he had to say about the Samsung document in the original article. He said

the document evaluates everything from the home screen to the browser to the built in apps on both devices. In each case, it comes up with a recommendation on what Samsung should do going forward and in most cases its answer is simple: Make it work more like the iPhone." Pretty damning.

He then of course back tracks and starts adding qualifications to that statement.

how many of these were actually implemented? How common are these types of comparisons (i.e., does Apple have them)? Are these protected by patents and the like? And, but that's largely irrelevant and mostly of interest to me because I'm a translator myself, who translated the document, and how well has he or she done the job?

Leaving aside the desperate and irrelevant red herring about translation what does this all add up to? Are you saying if indeed Samsung did use Apple's designs to design it's own kit then it was wrong? If so should Samsung be punished? Should such activity ever be condoned? Given the volumes you have written attacking Apple on this issue a few more detailed paragraphs laying out your take on the Samsung document and what it says about how Samsung behaved is the least you can do.

And still you call Apple a troll. Have you no shame?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Respond
by MOS6510 on Fri 10th Aug 2012 22:26 in reply to "RE[3]: Respond"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Well, in a way Thom asked correct questions.

However when Apple appears to be in the wrong, even when it's a suggested rumor with no merit but someone's imagination, he condemns Apple without any reserve, doubt or question. A few times already he got it wrong, but never did he publish a correction.

When it's Samsung, one of the good guys, everything is doubted and questioned. Even the translator is under suspicion.

We now know what happens after the verdict. If Apple wins the system is evil, the judge a fool and the jury a bunch bribed idiots. If Samsung wins the judge 'n' jury are sensible people.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Respond
by henderson101 on Sat 11th Aug 2012 08:39 in reply to "RE[4]: Respond"
henderson101 Member since:
2006-05-30

Without getting in to the same tired arguments on another unrelated story -Thom has already drawn the battle lines and admitted that he can't be objective. It's sad, but until he appoints a new Apple/Samsung news reported with a neutral perspective, you'll get this slanted view. I state again - neither party is clean, they are both corrupt, neither deserve to win.....

Reply Parent Score: 2