Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 24th Aug 2012 23:54 UTC
Legal And just like that, within a matter of days, the jury has reached a verdict in Apple vs. Samsung. The basic gist is simple: Apple's software patents are valid, and many Samsung devices infringe upon them. Apple's iPhone 3G trade dress is valid, and Samsung's Galaxy S line infringes, but other devices did not. Samsung did not infringe Apple's iPad design patent. Apple did not infringe any of Samsung's patents. Apple is awarded a little over $1 billion in damages. Competition lost today, and developers in the United States should really start to get worried - software patents got validated big time today.
Thread beginning with comment 532181
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:


Not the first graphical, touchscreen PDA (Palm's Zoomer was the first), and by far not the most successful - it was a major flop.


A laptop.


Overpriced (compare to the Amiga) less capable version of Xerox' work. Game changer for sure, but hardly innovative.

quick take

Invented and built by Kodak and Fujifilm. Digital photography is older than Apple itself.

mac OS

See Macintosh. The only successful homegrown operating system Apple has ever built, which they completely neglected for years until they became the laughing stock of the industry.


Fantastic device, but in the end, just a music player.


Fantastic device, but as a heavy former PDA user, kind of 'meh'.

Apple in a nutshell: great devices, made possible because of industry progress and copying others. I actually applaud that - it's just that Apple believes it should be the only one allowed to stand on the shoulders of giants.

Reply Parent Score: 4

kyousefi Member since:

You dismissed all these great products which many of them were pioneers of new markets (not primarily technologies) and defined new categories. Very good.

I've totally forgotten about the new markets and innovative product categories that samsung built in the fields of microwave oven, refrigerator, flat screen TV, dvd player and even wristwatch and oh, who can forget those "magically" 30$ digital frames?

The problem is -and I'm doing my best to be very respectful to you Thom and be fair-, with all due respect, there is a lack of understanding the distinction between product/market innovation and technological innovation on your side. And that's why you fail to understand why Apple (and designers like me) are angry and why samsung is guilty (And playing like a spoiled brat and pretending that it doesn't understand what it's done either)

Samsung pattern of business has been always like this: piggy backing on other pioneered markets, SONY in TV, American manufacturers in home appliances and now apple in Smartphones and tablets.

There is a difference between "standing on giant's shoulders" and "Piggy backing by copying the trade dress".

It's OK that they like to enter new markets to gain more profit, but they could do it like what Microsoft did with windows mobile. Nobody is angry of Microsoft because it's getting into multitouch Smartphone market because, a) they were trying to do these things on the phone and tablet since windows 3.0, b) they are doing it with Nokia, a market and technological pioneer in this field and c) they went their own way in defining every aspect of their product.

Imagine, if microsoft+nokia were first to introduce to the market instead of iPhone. Now, guess how would Samsung phones look like? Of course, they would look like exactly like a lumia. And Microsoft and samsung were in court instead of apple. And Samsung would say :"Microsoft can't assert the right to monopolize square tiles, they are at war with innovation". Come on.

Reply Parent Score: 0

JAlexoid Member since:

pioneers of new markets

Since this is the internet, I will happily fact check for you:
- Tablets - not a new market, thus Apple isn't a pioneer by a long shot
- Smartphones - not a new market(they didn't even expand it that much), thus Apple is not a pioneer by a long shot

Or do you have your own definition of "pioneer"?

Reply Parent Score: 2