This is ridiculous. It's got a screen, it's rectangular, and it's got a black bezel. Deal with it.

In fact, unless someone can point out how it's justifiable, I do not intend to buy any more Apple products out of principle.

miniyazz
This is ridiculous. It's got a screen, it's rectangular, and it's got a black bezel. Deal with it.

In fact, unless someone can point out how it's justifiable, I do not intend to buy any more Apple products out of principle.

I'd say if a judge has ruled in Apple's favour, then it's justifiable. It's Samsung you should be boycotting to let them know it's not cool to copy others ideas/designs/patents. I think your principles are misplaced.

miniyazz
This is ridiculous. It's got a screen, it's rectangular, and it's got a black bezel. Deal with it. In fact, unless someone can point out how it's justifiable, I do not intend to buy any more Apple products out of principle.

+1 on this, although I thought the big deal was the fact that it had a large visible single button too? Funnily enough I was seriously tempted to use the current HMV trade-in deal to upgrade my venerable 5G iPod for a new Classic - now I think I'll not bother and stick with what I've got. :P

the Galaxy Tab 10.1 has only recently become available to buy across Europe, and has been reported as being the fastest seller, after the iPad, of all tablets so far. Samsung has been the most conspicuous tablet competitor for Apple to date

Which, imho, is why Apple has done this - it's nothing to do with "protecting our intellectual property“ and everything to ”making sure that we continue to drag in the suckers, sorry ‘customers’, at the same rate". If it wasn't then why aren't Apple suing Motorola, Asus, Acer, HP all of whom make tablets (although I'd argue that no-one could mistake an Asus Transformer for an iPad - they look nothing alike except at the lowest level - i.e. it's a rectangular device with a screen).

By the way, to clarify the first statement I made in that previous paragraph - I've nothing against the iPad1 or iPad2 - from what I've seen they're pretty respectable devices with a pretty good OS and class-leading app support. On the other hand, Apple themselves are a bunch of no-good, whining, shiny-suited … :censored:

argh this angers me….

Which, imho, is why Apple has done this - it's nothing to do with “protecting our intellectual property” and everything to “making sure that we continue to drag in the suckers, sorry ‘customers’, at the same rate”. If it wasn't then why aren't Apple suing Motorola, Asus, Acer, HP all of whom make tablets (although I'd argue that no-one could mistake an Asus Transformer for an iPad - they look nothing alike except at the lowest level - i.e. it's a rectangular device with a screen).

You can't sue someone, and be awarded a temporary injuction, just because you fancy. It's clear that Samsung have likely infringed upon something that belongs to Apple. If you don't like the idea that Apple are sueing Samsung over this, I suggest you direct your “anger” towards Samsung for copying, not Apple for sueing.

Have you thought about the idea that it might only be Samsung that have infringed upon these patents and that Apple would therefore have no grounds to sue Motorola, Asus, Acer, HP, etc? It might also be the case that Apple and these other companies have licensing arrangements in place.

mrochester
I'd say if a judge has ruled in Apple's favour, then it's justifiable. It's Samsung you should be boycotting to let them know it's not cool to copy others ideas/designs/patents. I think your principles are misplaced.

The legal system has nothing to do with justice. We are witnessing the creation of yet another monopoly. Apple chose not to compete but to eliminate. Microsoft used equally monopolistic tactics decades ago to establish their dominance. MS concentrated more on hostile takeovers while Apple is copying Rambus with their patent trolling.

You never know, maybe Rambus patented patent trolling and is setting their sights on to Apple.

semo
The legal system has nothing to do with justice. We are witnessing the creation of yet another monopoly. Apple chose not to compete but to eliminate. Microsoft used equally monopolistic tactics decades ago to establish their dominance. MS concentrated more on hostile takeovers while Apple is copying Rambus with their patent trolling.

You never know, maybe Rambus patented patent trolling and is setting their sights on to Apple.

So if Samsung haven't ripped off something that belongs to Apple, why are they being prevented from selling the GT 10.1 in Europe? I also think you are confused about the definition of a patent troll. A patent troll would be an entity that files patents, but then doesn't develop them into a product and uses them only to sue other companies. Obviously, this definition doesn't apply to Apple since they have very much used their patents to develop a product.

mrochester
I'd say if a judge has ruled in Apple's favour, then it's justifiable. It's Samsung you should be boycotting to let them know it's not cool to copy others ideas/designs/patents. I think your principles are misplaced.

Sorry, I'm going to disagree - firstly this is a preliminary decision, not a final one. Secondly, the judge will purely be looking at the submissions made - so at best we can conclude that Samsung's paperwork wasn't good enough to prove prior art etc.

(That said, I'm not a lawyer)

An episode of Shark comes to mind where I'm sure James Woods' character claimed that he could get a judgement that the sky was green as long as the argument was good enough.

Not that I'm saying there's anything in it, but I remember some comments from fellow Hexus denizens when this stupid legal move started that the iPhone looks/looked suspiciously like an earlier Samsung device. If this is true then that'd be a good countersuit for Samsung to fire off - think being banned from selling iPhones would hurt Apple more than Samsung not being able to sell Galaxy Tab's. Although imho this'd be as equally bone-headed as Apple's current move. (see I'm being even-handed)

crossy
Sorry, I'm going to disagree - firstly this is a preliminary decision, not a final one. Secondly, the judge will purely be looking at the submissions made - so at best we can conclude that Samsung's paperwork wasn't good enough to prove prior art etc.

(That said, I'm not a lawyer)

An episode of Shark comes to mind where I'm sure James Woods' character claimed that he could get a judgement that the sky was green as long as the argument was good enough.

Not that I'm saying there's anything in it, but I remember some comments from fellow Hexus denizens when this stupid legal move started that the iPhone looks/looked suspiciously like an earlier Samsung device. If this is true then that'd be a good countersuit for Samsung to fire off - think being banned from selling iPhones would hurt Apple more than Samsung not being able to sell Galaxy Tab's. Although imho this'd be as equally bone-headed as Apple's current move. (see I'm being even-handed)

My understanding is that a temporary injuction is granted if the plaintiff can show/prove that they are likely to win the following trial. So it seems that Apple have been able to provide enough evidence that Samsung have infringed upon their patents and thus the temporary injuction has been granted. It's now up to Samsung to appeal that decision and prove how they haven't infringed on those patents, which will culminate in the actual trial itself.

crossy
Not that I'm saying there's anything in it, but I remember some comments from fellow Hexus denizens when this stupid legal move started that the iPhone looks/looked suspiciously like an earlier Samsung device. If this is true then that'd be a good countersuit for Samsung to fire off - think being banned from selling iPhones would hurt Apple more than Samsung not being able to sell Galaxy Tab's. Although imho this'd be as equally bone-headed as Apple's current move. (see I'm being even-handed)

I remember this…. Was it a fake or are we missing something? Surely they would have used this straight away if this was a valid move?

crossy
….

(That said, I'm not a lawyer) …

Me neither.

crossy
…. - firstly this is a preliminary decision, not a final one. Secondly, the judge will purely be looking at the submissions made - so at best we can conclude that Samsung's paperwork wasn't good enough to prove prior art etc.
….

Quite right, on the first, and quite wrong, as I understand it, on the second. Under the procedure in German IP cases, Samsung won't have been notified of the application. Basically, you go before a judge, present the basis for your claim and get a preliminary injunction. The idea is to prevent the harm being done in the first place, rather than to argue about compensation for harm done, after it's done.

But …. firstly, you've got to satisfy the judge that it's likely you'll win the main case, which will likely take a year or more, and may be appealed. Apple, clearly, managed to do that.

Secondly, if Apple lose, they'll have to compensate Samsung for the harm done to them, that is, indemnify them for the effect of lost sales. In other words, if you take this type of legal action and then proceed to lose the main case, it can get very expensive.

So, Apple have an EU design right, and they've convinced a German judge that there's a good likelihood that a full hearing, when Samsung do get to make their case, that it will succeed. Samsung will then have to convince that court that either their product doesn't infringe Apple's IP, or that the design right is somehow invalid and should never have been issued in the first place.

Oh, and Samsung could have filed a document that is in effect a pre-emptive strike against this, if they anticipated such as move by Apple. In the light of this same argument in other jurisdictions (Australia, Netherlands and even the US, as I understand it), it ought to have been able to predict Apple's claim. If it had filed such a document, it would have ensured it could put it's arguments to the judge before even a temporary injunction was granted. As it didn't, there's no obligation to inform Samsung of the application before the preliminary injunction is granted.

As far as I'm concerned, us having an opinion at this point in whether Apple are right or wrong to seek this injunction is entirely unreasonable, unless we have a thorough understand of :-

- Apple's IP rights, and
- Samsung's products and the alleged infringement, and
- EU IP law.

IP laws for a reason, and ultimately, it's a reason that benefits ALL of us, most of the time. In it's absence, the levels of investment necessary to develop so many products, not least most drugs, wouldn't be possible because as soon as you invented/discovered something worthwhile, it'd get ripped off. So you wouldn't spend the money necessary to invent/discover it.

IP law, therefore, it an absolute necessity for progress at anything like it's current levels, and as soon as you have laws, you have the potential, or even near certainty, or disputes. Which means you need a court, with powers that have real teeth. And this court does. It's going to get very expensive for Samsung if they breach this order, and it's going to get very expensive for Apple if they take this course and lose the main hearing.

In the mean time, which one of us is going to claim we know enough about the issues, and the laws, to form an informed opinion about the legal validity of Apple's claim? And can whoever does, please explain the details so the rest of us can understand?

Because without that informed understanding, anything else on the rights or wrongs of this is just so much hot air.

cameronlite
I remember this…. Was it a fake or are we missing something? Surely they would have used this straight away if this was a valid move?

Yeah I would have expected Samsung to pounce long before now if there had been a valid claim to be made. Either that or they've simply chosen not to persue it.

cameronlite
I remember this…. Was it a fake or are we missing something? Surely they would have used this straight away if this was a valid move?

Did Samsung have a registered design right that Apple infringed? Presumably not, or Samsung would have gone after Apple in exactly the same way Apple are now going after Samsung.

I have no preference either way. This is not ‘noble’ cowboys and ‘murderous, savage’ indians, or white hats and black hats, or cops and robbers. It's two mega-corporations conducting a public legalistic bare-knuckles fist-fight. I've no idea who's in the right and who's in the wrong, and moreover, personally, don't much care.

mrochester
So if Samsung haven't ripped off something that belongs to Apple, why are they being prevented from selling the GT 10.1 in Europe? I also think you are confused about the definition of a patent troll. A patent troll would be an entity that files patents, but then doesn't develop them into a product and uses them only to sue other companies. Obviously, this definition doesn't apply to Apple since they have very much used their patents to develop a product.

I still don't understand what could have been ripped off from Apple. These days you can buy a cell phone with a small rectangular screen and with about a dozen buttons underneath from many different brands. You can buy a car with 4 doors, 4 wheels, etc… from many different brands. Why should Apple be the only brand from which we can buy a rectangular device that has a touch sensitive screen on the front with a diagonal size of 3.5“ to 11”?

I'm looking at this from a consumer's point of view. I don't want to have only one choice of smartphone in a year's time….

semo
I still don't understand what could have been ripped off from Apple. These days you can buy a cell phone with a small rectangular screen and with about a dozen buttons underneath from many different brands. You can buy a car with 4 doors, 4 wheels, etc… from many different brands. Why should Apple be the only brand from which we can buy a rectangular device that has a touch sensitive screen on the front with a diagonal size of 3.5“ to 11”?

I'm looking at this from a consumer's point of view. I don't want to have only one choice of smartphone in a year's time….

Well it seems likely that something has been ripped off else this judgement wouldn't have been granted. Why don't Samsung just design and make a tablet that doesn't infringe on anyones patents? That would seem like the sensible thing to have done in the first instance!

semo
I still don't uWhy should Apple be the only brand from which we can buy a rectangular device that has a touch sensitive screen on the front with a diagonal size of 3.5“ to 11”?
.

Samsung are the not the only company to offer a tablet. Asus and plenty of other manufactures offer very similar products. Question is what has Samsung copied from Apple, that the other brands haven't done.

I hate Apple as a company and loath this decision, but at the end of the day Samsung clearly have copied something they shouldn't have, while other tablet makers haven't got this issue - (yet!)

semo
i still don't understand what could have been ripped off from apple. These days you can buy a cell phone with a small rectangular screen and with about a dozen buttons underneath from many different brands. You can buy a car with 4 doors, 4 wheels, etc… From many different brands. Why should apple be the only brand from which we can buy a rectangular device that has a touch sensitive screen on the front with a diagonal size of 3.5“ to 11”?

I'm looking at this from a consumer's point of view. I don't want to have only one choice of smartphone in a year's time….

+1



..

mrochester
Well it seems likely that something has been ripped off else this judgement wouldn't have been granted. Why don't Samsung just design and make a tablet that doesn't infringe on anyones patents? That would seem like the sensible thing to have done in the first instance!

Because there are so many patents for so many ridiculous little things that it is, quite frankly, next to impossible to design a tablet that doesn't infringe on any patents. Even if you've never even been out into the real world and have come up with the entire design of the tablet in your mum's basement.

mrochester
Well it seems likely that something has been ripped off else this judgement wouldn't have been granted.

In a perfect World n'all that - I think things work a little differently when it comes to patents in reality with plenty of evidence in recent times of abuse of the system(s) involved. Saracen hit the nail on the head - to assume either way really is a bit daft right now given how little you or I know. Apple are certainly motivated by the increased competition from Android in a number of markets and more so by their ongoing spat with Samsung (and in other cases it looks a lot more clear cut). Patents are now a commodity used as a hammer in business against rivals - certainly they were never intended as such and I (for one) think the system needs a great deal of reform (regardless of the aggressor/right/wrongs). Why anybody would cheer on either opponent here is beyond me..

That said, as a consumer i'd certainly like choice

i would imagine if apple win the case against samsung they will then go after more companies. it sounds like they have taken issue with samsung in particular, moreso than other companies and using them as the test case

whether you agree with the ruling or not, few could disagree that samsung and others haven't simply copied apple in creating tablets. apple weren't the first to create them, there were tablets around years ago, 10+ years even, but they didn't do very well and certainly didn't become a mass market product, probably due to size and specs at the time.

likewise with the ipod, apple weren't first, but if you were being really honest, they are the company that everyone copied, and all the competing products came out because apple created the market, but most other mp3 players had different styling, buttons and functions

apple then created the ipod touch, and then iphone. small touch screen devices than ran apps and let people browse the web. others started copying the iphone, including samsung, but who thought of copying the idea and making a big iphone/touch as a tablet computer? only apple it seems. it wasn't until the rumours came out about the ipad that other companies then started looking to copy the idea. before apple announced the ipad, no-one needed one and no-one wanted one. very different to ipods in that the device replaced the minidisc/cd/tape/etc walkman, so did a regular function differently. apple created a new market for a new type of product and other people copied it. but unlike the ipod clones, the ipad clones look clearly similar and operate clearly similar to the ipad

for consumers it would be great to have a decent cheap alternative to the ipad, but there just isn't one. the cheap ones are crap. the others that could compete are priced similarly to the ipad and do pretty much the same things. samsungs advertising that i've seen this week is along the lines off there was ipad but now we've made a better one. but it looks pretty much the same, so it's no wonder apple are using any legal powers they can to stop it

i'm surprised they haven't done the same with the samsung iphones, whatever they call them. it's clearly obvious they copied the iphone, the latest model in particular. again it doesn't do anything particularly different, and it's not particularly cheaper either. and considering apple haven't had a new phone out in over a year and the new android handsets don't do anything notable that apples year old phone can do just goes to show that apple are leading the way for these devices

so when you consider how apple lost the computer market and ended up with a tiny 5% ish share and windows dominates, it's hard to believe apple have led with 3 separate types of device, especially considering the considerable apple backlash it gets from people who consider it over priced, tied down, for fanboys and sheep

the galaxy tabs are one of the few ranges of tablets that are worth considering as an alternate to ipad as far as i'm concerned, but the price point puts me off. i'd rather have a second hand ipad at about half the price. if the price was right then i'd maybe be persuaded, but the android tablets are currently just overpriced or crap ipad clones, and i don't think that combination is making ipad alternatives an appealing option to many people

mrochester
Well it seems likely that something has been ripped off else this judgement wouldn't have been granted. Why don't Samsung just design and make a tablet that doesn't infringe on anyones patents? That would seem like the sensible thing to have done in the first instance!

Just to be picky, though it's technically an important if subtle point …. it's about design IP, not patents. It's important because the implementation of design rights and patents are very different.

Still on sale here in Cambridge - just been out for a play :)

Chances are this relates to Apple alleging patents on touch screen interface for mobile devices belong to it.

I hope Apple lose because the alleged patents are totally obvious and I disagree with patents for computer software in any event.

Mrochester: effectively what Apple are trying to do is ban anyone making any competing device with an iPhone or iPad if it has a touch screen and an interface that looks like it used Apple as a design influence. The patent system has got completely out of control and is no longer fit for purpose.

Sorry, did a bit more digging.

Injunction has been granted because Samsung infringed not a patent but a EU community design right (no 000181607-0001).

I have had a look at the design right granted. Apple now have a design right until 2014 (which is extendible) for a portable computer that is rectangular in shape and where the front consists of a screen and a bezel with some buttons on the side.

Not exactly original - what next Biro take out a EU community design right for a portable writing tool that consists of a tube which has ink in it and a nib at one end?

Brewster0101
Samsung are the not the only company to offer a tablet. Asus and plenty of other manufactures offer very similar products. Question is what has Samsung copied from Apple, that the other brands haven't done.

I hate Apple as a company and loath this decision, but at the end of the day Samsung clearly have copied something they shouldn't have, while other tablet makers haven't got this issue - (yet!)

I think if Apple win this case outright, then they might use it to squash other competitors (I can't remember the term for these legal cases).

Have a look for yourself:

http://esearch.oami.europa.eu/copla/design/data/000181607-0001

Having just seen practically all the tablets this lunchtime - I couldn't say that was even categorically an iPad let alone a GT!

The Samsung GT 10.1 is nothing like the iPad.

No centre hardware button, lock button is in a different place, volume rocker in is a different place, front facing webcam is in a different place, dock port is in a different place, speakers are in a different place, rear facing camera is in a different place, 3.5mm jack is in a different place, screen is a different size and ratio.

Q_Q its a rectangle with a screen.

Apple hating because it's thinner and lighter.

cjs150
Sorry, did a bit more digging.

Injunction has been granted because Samsung infringed not a patent but a EU community design right (no 000181607-0001).

I have had a look at the design right granted. Apple now have a design right until 2014 (which is extendible) for a portable computer that is rectangular in shape and where the front consists of a screen and a bezel with some buttons on the side.

Not exactly original - what next Biro take out a EU community design right for a portable writing tool that consists of a tube which has ink in it and a nib at one end?

Wow!!

interesting… how can they even have that design? at the end of the day, apple were very very late to the tablet market and i think its safe to say windows tablets from like year 2000 were rectangle and had a screen….. wtf?

uni
i would imagine if apple win the case against samsung they will then go after more companies. it sounds like they have taken issue with samsung in particular, moreso than other companies and using them as the test case

I'd agree with that assessment. Was watching one of the new Futurama's and it's interesting to see that the writers there are associating the evil “MomCorp” with a Ap–e

uni
whether you agree with the ruling or not, few could disagree that samsung and others haven't simply copied apple in creating tablets. apple weren't the first to create them, there were tablets around years ago, 10+ years even, but they didn't do very well and certainly didn't become a mass market product, probably due to size and specs at the time.

Not sure I'd agree totally - you're 100% correct that the advent of cheap processors with good power/performance ratios have made the tablet as we know it possible. But other folks (e.g. HP) have had similar form factor products, but they just remained “concepts”.

uni
but who thought of copying the idea and making a big iphone/touch as a tablet computer? only apple it seems. it wasn't until the rumours came out about the ipad that other companies then started looking to copy the idea. before apple announced the ipad, no-one needed one and no-one wanted one.

Again, agreed - even the hardest Apple-hater will agree that marketing is something that they're very, very good at.

uni
apple created a new market for a new type of product and other people copied it. but unlike the ipod clones, the ipad clones look clearly similar and operate clearly similar to the ipad

Stop calling everything that's not an iPad a “clone”, they aren't. The fact that - like cars - there's a “best” basic shape means that - at a low level - all tablets will tend to look generically the same. E.g. screen surrounded by bezel with one or more buttons.

uni
for consumers it would be great to have a decent cheap alternative to the ipad, but there just isn't one. the cheap ones are crap. the others that could compete are priced similarly to the ipad and do pretty much the same things. and considering apple haven't had a new phone out in over a year and the new android handsets don't do anything notable that apples year old phone can do just goes to show that apple are leading the way for these devices

See above - a smart phone is merely a portable device that can run downloadable software, what were you expecting an Android (or Win7Mobile) smartphone to do - read your mind, make the tea? Note that the iPhone isn't doing anything that even earlier smartphones didn't - Apple's smarts was “just” to make those functions easier to get at.

uni
the galaxy tabs are one of the few ranges of tablets that are worth considering as an alternate to ipad as far as i'm concerned, but the price point puts me off. i'd rather have a second hand ipad at about half the price. if the price was right then i'd maybe be persuaded, but the android tablets are currently just overpriced or crap ipad clones, and i don't think that combination is making ipad alternatives an appealing option to many people

You've not looked hard enough then. I'll put my Asus Transformer (which, by the way, I think is a nicer looking design than either iPad!) against your iPad and probably be able to match it feature for feature. And no, I'm not going to defend the Moto Xoom - that damn slab IS way overpriced.

cjs150
Injunction has been granted because Samsung infringed not a patent but a EU community design right (no 000181607-0001). I have had a look at the design right granted. Apple now have a design right until 2014 (which is extendible) for a portable computer that is rectangular in shape and where the front consists of a screen and a bezel with some buttons on the side.

!! Talk about generic - heck I can't think of a single tablet that doesn't resemble those diagrams (there's a copy on scribd). Actually I'm not sure that there's not a few eReaders that also look like that. What complete a-hole allowed that one through?! Or am I missing that the diagrams don't show any buttons (or expansion - apart from the dock connection) - how are you supposed to power up?

That said, and I apologise to Galaxy Tab fans - looking at the GT and the iPad2 side-by-side at a glance and you could mistake one for the other. PlayBook, TouchPad, Iconia and Transformer seem to be less visually alike.

holy multi quote. you know how hard it is to read them, or how horrible?

the tab with the keyboard thing that turns into a netbook is one of the non clone tablets. it's perhaps the best ipad alternative, as regards to looks/specs/etc, although i've never played with one in the flesh, the idea is great

but the car analogy, cars have all sorts of shapes and sizes, and as i mentioned before, we've had tablets long before the ipad, but none that looked like the ipad. the current crop are pretty much copying the ipads style. problem is, it would take a lot of thought to make another tablet that didn't look so much like it. but apple obviously spent a lot of thought on that specific design, so i'm sure with more thought someone could find a new design that's a bit different. slide out keyboard maybe, though probably very hard, but then you get slide out keyboards on some smart phones. touch screen on the back, buttons on the back or the front, i don't know, but it's not completely impossible

uni
the current crop are pretty much copying the ipads style. problem is, it would take a lot of thought to make another tablet that didn't look so much like it. but apple obviously spent a lot of thought on that specific design, so i'm sure with more thought someone could find a new design that's a bit different. slide out keyboard maybe, though probably very hard, but then you get slide out keyboards on some smart phones. touch screen on the back, buttons on the back or the front, i don't know, but it's not completely impossible

I think you'll find that you wouldn't just have to put a lot of thought into it, you'd most likely have to invent a worse device - now why would you do that?

uni
holy multi quote. you know how hard it is to read them, or how horrible?

Not very - you really found that hard to follow? First time i've seen someone moan about it here anyway.

uni
the tab with the keyboard thing that turns into a netbook is one of the non clone tablets. it's perhaps the best ipad alternative, as regards to looks/specs/etc, although i've never played with one in the flesh, the idea is great

Odd thing is, I though they ALL looked similar @ lunch today. In fact, it did surprise me that the transformer in particular didn't look a World away from the GT (sans keyboard obviously). The point is here that a tablet will naturally be an incredibly generic looking thing - it's very hard to differentiate them (after all it's a portable touchscreen and not a lot else). You can only really differentiate in software, ports or addons (all of which vary from device to device) - which you touched on when talking about the car analogy (which is flawed I agree) where the scope is much wider.

But what's really perplexing here is that Apples *own* submitted design is far more generic than their own iPad 1/2 - and deliberately so (this is what you pay the men in suits to do to broaden your claim as far as possible - I've seen it done on my own patents) which is what has people going “wtf” and so forth when trying to work out what exactly makes sense about granting such a thing in the first place.

cameronlite
I think you'll find that you wouldn't just have to put a lot of thought into it, you'd most likely have to invent a worse device - now why would you do that?

i think that's a narrow minded point of view

look at previous tablets before the ipad. the ipad looks nothing like them

imagine what a tablet would look like in 5 or 10 years. do you think it would look like the ipad?

do you think it would be a worse device?


with some real thought and investment people can come up with different and better ideas. it's been happening through history. so has copying ideas

take a week and think of a different design for a tablet to the ipad. i bet you can. especially if you think of original tablets that were basically laptops with a screen that turned round and laid on top of the keyboard. think of how you could make the ipad better. i've already mentioned a way as an example, a slide out keyboard. i'll give you another idea, a laser keyboard. remember the keyboards that shone a laser on the desk and you typed in the spaces?

if apple's patent meant that no-one could have that type of design at all, do you reall think it would stop people from making tablets? or do you think they would try and make a better and different tablet?

dangel
Not very - you really found that hard to follow? First time i've seen someone moan about it here anyway.



Odd thing is, I though they ALL looked similar @ lunch today. In fact, it did surprise me that the transformer in particular didn't look a World away from the GT (sans keyboard obviously). The point is here that a tablet will naturally be an incredibly generic looking thing - it's very hard to differentiate them (after all it's a portable touchscreen and not a lot else). You can only really differentiate in software, ports or addons (all of which vary from device to device) - which you touched on when talking about the car analogy (which is flawed I agree) where the scope is much wider.

But what's really perplexing here is that Apples *own* submitted design is far more generic than their own iPad 1/2 - and deliberately so (this is what you pay the men in suits to do to broaden your claim as far as possible - I've seen it done on my own patents) which is what has people going “wtf” and so forth when trying to work out what exactly makes sense about granting such a thing in the first place.

so your lunchtime trip has basically shown that everyone is copying apples design, and apple has been lucky? or spent a lot of time and money on research and design? to come up with a design that's an instant classic. and that's what others are copying

just look at previous tablets. laptops with reversed screens, or devices with tray like handles on the side, functional to a point, but bulky and not particularly asthetically pleasing. apple came up with the look that every wants or wants to copy

my point is that as there were different designs of tablets in the past, there will be different designs of tablets in the future. i'm not a designer so i don't know what they would be. perhaps a slide out keyboard, or the laser keyboard. maybe something like the court stenographs where you hold in both hands and press buttons on the back to type. but apple created the multitouch screen on the tablet, not stylus required, no keyboard required, plus the good looks. they got the style right and the functionality right. they really got onto a winner, and that winner is hard to beat, but not unbeatable. maybe something like kinnect that will use gestures, maybe something like the wii that uses more movements. as you can see, each time we come to a point where we think we can't get much further, someone comes along with a new idea. then someone will copy it if it's good!

take pc's, you could say they all look the same, but really, whislt they are all typically boxy things, the internals and externals are different, plus there's probably a ton of patents and copyrights paid for in each model

of course for other tablet makers to make something truly original would take a lot more effort and time to create. i presume apple planned the ipad long before it was announced, but competitors could only start around that time, so apple had the jump on them. but then the competitors took the ideas and copied them to catch up to now. but is that really fair? we all love nice cheap stuff, but think about the millions apple invested to create the ipad, before the manufacturing costs, and think about how much the other companies saved by not requiring the same element of research. plus when you consider that no-one wanted or needed a tablet before the ipad, apple basically created the market that others are trying to take a bite off

and these are all huge multinational companies, so saying apple is a big bully to the likes of samsung or motorola is ridiculous. samsung are so big they make parts for apple. apple don't actually make anything! they just design and market and outsource manufacturing

it does beg the question as to how apple pulled this off. how come no-one else did? just over 10 years ago apple were nearly down the pan. the idea of the ipod saved them. no other big manufacturer managed to take the idea and make it big like they did. same with smartphones. they were all very much for the yuppie businessman until apple persuaded everyone they can't possible spend more than 30 seconds away from facebook and twitter. how come nokia or motorola or sony couldn't do that? then the ipad, i dunno, asus, microsoft, sony, what happened? how did the company with the tiny share in the computer market take the entire market for a third new, but not really entirely new product

and what next? what tech product is currently languishing? what is the next thing someone could relaunch as a big thing? using marketing to persuade people they really want it, whether they need it or not? are apple going to get that market too?

the problem is there are too few real innovators these days, or at least people who can take a good idea, make it better and make it work

maybe it will take a new company, or a newish one like google. maybe the 80s and 90s tech companies will slowly go the way of other companies from the 50s and 60s that didn't move with the times

what's the next big thing? wireless. that's wire free. get rid of the wires in your house that connect your hifi and tv. get rid of the power sockets and plugs. can't be done? are you sure? what about the inducting charging devices or the electric car charges that don't even touch? wireless speakers

i think the next thing in a few years will be something that few will think off now. 20 years ago who thought you would be listening to music from computer based devices like ipods and not cds? 15 years ago who thought we could access the internet on mobile phones or download movies and music from the internet

flying cars may have been the dream a few decades ago but what's the new realistic dream? tomorrows possibility?

uni
i think that's a narrow minded point of view

While it would be a narrow minded view in other aspects of technology i don't think it applies here.

That design is generic - it is a screen with buttons on the side and a port at the base. Innovation is great but at the end of the day the tablet form factor is a screen size of about 10“ which front and back cameras with buttons that are on the side because there's a screen on the front!

Please, please tell me how you could make a tablet that doesn't follow that design. You can't, because the definition of a tablet itself can't be protected.

It would be like Samsung sueing Sony because their laptops have a 15.6” screen on hinges with a keyboard and ports on the side. If I'm wrong, please identify the differences between this tablet dispute and my invented laptop dispute…

uni
imagine what a tablet would look like in 5 or 10 years. do you think it would look like the ipad?

Technically… if it's going to be classed as a tablet, it has to have a screen on the front with buttons on the side and a port for charging (unless wireless power is effective by then!) Otherwise it isn't a tablet…

We need a balance here, between protecting your investmemt on one hand, and trying to corner a market by litigation on the other hand. I think Apple have gone too far, and I rather hope this case fails badly.

uni
but the car analogy, cars have all sorts of shapes and sizes, and as i mentioned before, we've had tablets long before the ipad, but none that looked like the ipad.

A few years ago I read about a study that showed how similar modern cars look. They took off the badges and all other recognisable trademark features such as the grilles. They found that most subjects couldn't id the car brands. 4 wheels, 4 doors, engine at the front, etc…

The GT is a different size compared to the ipad. If Samsung chopped off the corners so that their tablet looks more like an octagon, Apple will probably still protest. Not because someone might confuse the brands but because consumers will exercise their right to choose, and decide not to buy a fruit.

I'm not defending Samsung (in fact I hate them for helping Apple achieve such domination) but I would hate for them to loose this battle out of principle.

uni
the problem is there are too few real innovators these days, or at least people who can take a good idea, make it better and make it work

Oddly enough there's a lot of commonality in what I actually said and how you interpreted it but you're still wide of the mark for most of that post aside from the above. Ask yourself why innovation is being stifled - think carefully - in this specific case. I've no hate for Apple but things do not look right to me from what information i've seen so far - and I'd say that if the roles were reversed..

HolograM's call for balance is exactly right.

dangel
Odd thing is, I though they ALL looked similar @ lunch today. In fact, it did surprise me that the transformer in particular didn't look a World away from the GT (sans keyboard obviously). The point is here that a tablet will naturally be an incredibly generic looking thing - it's very hard to differentiate them (after all it's a portable touchscreen and not a lot else). You can only really differentiate in software, ports or addons (all of which vary from device to device) - which you touched on when talking about the car analogy (which is flawed I agree) where the scope is much wider.

Hmm, I'm going to disagree to an extent - the Iconia does look different from the front to the iPads, similarly there's no way you could mistake one of the Archos tablets for an iPad either. I'll vehemently disagree that the Transformer looks like the Galaxy Tab - desktop etc are obviously identical, but from any other view than face-on the difference is clear. Interesting that the design filing being referred to doesn't actually carry the single button that I'd understood was Apple's “trademark”.

uni
so your lunchtime trip has basically shown that everyone is copying apples design, and apple has been lucky? or spent a lot of time and money on research and design? to come up with a design that's an instant classic. and that's what others are copying

No, no, no, no! The point that I (and others) are trying to make is that today's tablet consists of a screen, battery, “guts” and case. And while I totally agree with your assertions that we need to see more innovation, the fact remains that you need a (relatively!) cheap, portable, lightweight device that you can (easily?) operate standing up. Hence you end up with something akin to a writing pad with the screen at the front and a minimal bezel to keep bulk and weight down. Which is exactly what some dingbat in the EU has granted rights to Apple for! Yes, I'd like to see gesture, keyboards etc - but they'd compromise one or more of the cheap/portable/light/one-handed-operation requirements. IMHO, the current granted design right is as dumb as if Levi's got a similar design right for trousers (stitched fabric to wrap around pelvis and legs with storage pockets and a method of fastening the waistband).

Note that after consideration my argument is really with the halfwit in the EU who granted this. I would have zero problem with Apple having filed a right that - for example - specified the normal tablet format and included their trademark (?) single button. That said, I'm somewhat annoyed at Apple that they sought to merely go after #2 in the sales list, rather than all major “infringers” - e.g. HP, Asus, Acer, Blackberry, Motorola, etc. I'm annoyed, but I understand the commercial reasons.

Excellent post of yours by the way - very thoughtful. :thumbsup:

HolograM
We need a balance here, between protecting your investmemt on one hand, and trying to corner a market by litigation on the other hand. I think Apple have gone too far, and I rather hope this case fails badly.

As I said above, this DR should never have been granted - since (based on my minimal understanding of the issues) if Apple decide to fully enforce it then they're going to end up with a monopoly on tablet sales in the EU - which I would politely suggest that even the most pro-Appleista would agree is bad news for consumers. So, like you, I hope Apple lose this case and the whole market can move on…

crossy
Hmm, I'm going to disagree to an extent - the Iconia does look different from the front to the iPads, similarly there's no way you could mistake one of the Archos tablets for an iPad either. I'll vehemently disagree that the Transformer looks like the Galaxy Tab - desktop etc are obviously identical, but from any other view than face-on the difference is clear. Interesting that the design filing being referred to doesn't actually carry the single button that I'd understood was Apple's “trademark”.

The comparison I was making was in the context of the design filing to some extent but.. TBH I really was surprised how similar the GT and the Transformer look IRL - yes I was mainly looking head on but the size and general shape was much of a muchness to me. I'd expected the Transformer to be ‘chunky’ for some reason by comparison to the GT - and I was all set to go with the GT until seeing them for myself. Now i'm er.. undecided :)
Anyway, all as a potential punter and all from my POV and IMHO.

I agree with the general thrust of this thread - that a tablet is by definition a rectangular touch-screen powered by some components and buttons - and thus should not be the intellectual property of any one party.

But the other thing that seems to be overlooked is that most of the value of a tablet comes from the platform, which is the main reason Apple continues to dominate. I think Samsung and co should be able to argue that simply by using a different platform they have made a completely different product.

looks like Apple are after the Xoom too.

http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/08/11/0335201/Apple-Files-Suit-Against-Motorola-Xoom-In-EU

cameronlite
While it would be a narrow minded view in other aspects of technology i don't think it applies here.

That design is generic - it is a screen with buttons on the side and a port at the base. Innovation is great but at the end of the day the tablet form factor is a screen size of about 10“ which front and back cameras with buttons that are on the side because there's a screen on the front!

Please, please tell me how you could make a tablet that doesn't follow that design. You can't, because the definition of a tablet itself can't be protected.

It would be like Samsung sueing Sony because their laptops have a 15.6” screen on hinges with a keyboard and ports on the side. If I'm wrong, please identify the differences between this tablet dispute and my invented laptop dispute…



Technically… if it's going to be classed as a tablet, it has to have a screen on the front with buttons on the side and a port for charging (unless wireless power is effective by then!) Otherwise it isn't a tablet…

why do you have to have the buttons on the side? why can't you have them on the front or the back?

there is already a button on the front of the ipad. so why can't somone else put more buttons on the front if that's the problem. how many buttons do you really need on a tablet? on and off and maybe one more. you could put recessed buttons or switches in the bottom, so they are only pressed when you want to. it's not entirely necessary to have them on the side

i don't think the issue is with the cables either, but induction charging is possible, although i would imagine if someone was going to do it first on a table it would be a fruity named company

with laptops or desktops there is a lot more to the design. if you look at a load of laptops in a computer shop from different manufacturers they will all look different, but the tablets do bear a striking resemblance to the ipad, which is very different to the stylings of any previous tablets. so it's perfectly possible to create tablets that don't look like the ipad. you just need to be more open minded about the approach. to use an over used term, think outside the box

Scott B;2110141
I agree with the general thrust of this thread - that a tablet is by definition a rectangular touch-screen powered by some components and buttons - and thus should not be the intellectual property of any one party.

But the other thing that seems to be overlooked is that most of the value of a tablet comes from the platform, which is the main reason Apple continues to dominate. I think Samsung and co should be able to argue that simply by using a different platform they have made a completely different product.

i agree that apples iphone and ipad are nicer due to the OS, but i think apple would also argue that others have copied iOS too. look at the samsung iphone. how much closer to looking like an iphone could they get? they just need to stick a pear on the back with a bite taken out

semo
A few years ago I read about a study that showed how similar modern cars look. They took off the badges and all other recognisable trademark features such as the grilles. They found that most subjects couldn't id the car brands. 4 wheels, 4 doors, engine at the front, etc…

The GT is a different size compared to the ipad. If Samsung chopped off the corners so that their tablet looks more like an octagon, Apple will probably still protest. Not because someone might confuse the brands but because consumers will exercise their right to choose, and decide not to buy a fruit.

I'm not defending Samsung (in fact I hate them for helping Apple achieve such domination) but I would hate for them to loose this battle out of principle.

i'm not into cars, but you have a number of different basic shapes of cars, like mini, hatchback, estate, sports car etc. and you have different stylings on each. i have to say that there are a lot of medium size cars that all look pretty similar, but if you did line them up you would be able to tell differences such as the grill etc. whether you can tell the brand is another thing altogether. i'm not sure that's the issue with apple rather than them creating the perfect “generic” design and other companies instead of trying to create something different are just copying it instead

i suppose you could make the pad a slightly different shape even with the screen the same size. create vastly exagerated more rounded corners. but would that make it any better? probably not. so what would make a better design that was different? i don't know or i'd be a designer. but that's up to the manufacturers to figure out. how to create something of their own

uni
i agree that apples iphone and ipad are nicer due to the OS, but i think apple would also argue that others have copied iOS too. look at the samsung iphone. how much closer to looking like an iphone could they get? they just need to stick a pear on the back with a bite taken out

I'm not going to argue with you there! They are almost clones, visibly - but this isn't what they are using in their legal battle…

uni
why do you have to have the buttons on the side? why can't you have them on the front or the back?

there is already a button on the front of the ipad. so why can't somone else put more buttons on the front if that's the problem. how many buttons do you really need on a tablet? on and off and maybe one more. you could put recessed buttons or switches in the bottom, so they are only pressed when you want to. it's not entirely necessary to have them on the side

with laptops or desktops there is a lot more to the design. if you look at a load of laptops in a computer shop from different manufacturers they will all look different, but the tablets do bear a striking resemblance to the ipad, which is very different to the stylings of any previous tablets. so it's perfectly possible to create tablets that don't look like the ipad. you just need to be more open minded about the approach. to use an over used term, think outside the box

The fact is that you wouldn't put volume buttons that you use now and again on the front, and you certainly wouldn't put them on the back incase the table is on a surface. As for recessed buttons, i think that's too subtle a change to really distinguish between tablets and Apples design permit (or whatever it it :p)

Again, you wouldn't put buttons on the base, because if you're holding the tablet, your hands aren't usually on the base!

Regarding your laptop comment, draw a picture of a laptop shell and then tell me it doesn't represent almost every laptop. My point is: Apples tablet design that they are using in court is pretty much the definition of a sodding tablet, the same would be true if you drew a laptop shell.

crossy
….. Which is exactly what some dingbat in the EU has granted rights to Apple for!

…. IMHO, the current granted design right is as dumb as if Levi's got a similar design right for trousers (stitched fabric to wrap around pelvis and legs with storage pockets and a method of fastening the waistband).

Note that after consideration my argument is really with the halfwit in the EU who granted this. I would have zero problem with Apple having filed a right that …..

As I said above, this DR should never have been granted - since (based on my minimal understanding of the issues) if Apple decide to fully enforce it then they're going to end up with a monopoly on tablet sales in the EU - which I would politely suggest that even the most pro-Appleista would agree is bad news for consumers. So, like you, I hope Apple lose this case and the whole market can move on…

A technical point for you. In the UK, design rights aren't granted, they're automatic and inherent in any qualifying product. It's rather like copyright - it's inherent in the creation of an “artistic”work. If I right a book or take a photo or compose some music, I don't have to do zip for it top be protected by copyright. The same applies to design rights - if a product meets the criteria, it's protected. Period.

But design rights and “Registered Design” are different. The latter you have to apply for, and pay for.

Similar distinctions apply EWU-wide to “Registered” and unregistered Community Designs. The former you apply for (but not pay for, as it's free), and the latter you get automatically. The difference, as with the UK, is in the level and especially duration of protection. The explicitly registered designs last for longer than the free ones (a LOT longer, in the case of EU Community Designs), and the protections are stronger.


Which Apple are relying on here I've no idea. But if it's an unregistered design, nobody in the EU granted it.


It's also worth pointing out that these rights don't just apply to anything anyone designs,. The need to have an element of originality of character, and just about all exclude “features dictated by technical function.”

On a seperate note, I can confirm Apple sueing Motorola.

They're sueing Moto, but it's actually Atmel (who make their screen logic) that have breached a patent (Apple think). Atmel are putting up a pretty good, logical fight, so I can see Apple losing it.

Assuming that Apple are only sueing over one patent, which is unlikely.

Scott B;2110141
….

But the other thing that seems to be overlooked is that most of the value of a tablet comes from the platform, which is the main reason Apple continues to dominate. I think Samsung and co should be able to argue that simply by using a different platform they have made a completely different product.

That's not what they're fighting over, though. It's the design, not the functionality. At least, as I understand it, it is.

crossy
Hmm, I'm going to disagree to an extent - the Iconia does look different from the front to the iPads, similarly there's no way you could mistake one of the Archos tablets for an iPad either. I'll vehemently disagree that the Transformer looks like the Galaxy Tab - desktop etc are obviously identical, but from any other view than face-on the difference is clear. Interesting that the design filing being referred to doesn't actually carry the single button that I'd understood was Apple's “trademark”.

No, no, no, no! The point that I (and others) are trying to make is that today's tablet consists of a screen, battery, “guts” and case. And while I totally agree with your assertions that we need to see more innovation, the fact remains that you need a (relatively!) cheap, portable, lightweight device that you can (easily?) operate standing up. Hence you end up with something akin to a writing pad with the screen at the front and a minimal bezel to keep bulk and weight down. Which is exactly what some dingbat in the EU has granted rights to Apple for! Yes, I'd like to see gesture, keyboards etc - but they'd compromise one or more of the cheap/portable/light/one-handed-operation requirements. IMHO, the current granted design right is as dumb as if Levi's got a similar design right for trousers (stitched fabric to wrap around pelvis and legs with storage pockets and a method of fastening the waistband).

Note that after consideration my argument is really with the halfwit in the EU who granted this. I would have zero problem with Apple having filed a right that - for example - specified the normal tablet format and included their trademark (?) single button. That said, I'm somewhat annoyed at Apple that they sought to merely go after #2 in the sales list, rather than all major “infringers” - e.g. HP, Asus, Acer, Blackberry, Motorola, etc. I'm annoyed, but I understand the commercial reasons.

Excellent post of yours by the way - very thoughtful. :thumbsup:

As I said above, this DR should never have been granted - since (based on my minimal understanding of the issues) if Apple decide to fully enforce it then they're going to end up with a monopoly on tablet sales in the EU - which I would politely suggest that even the most pro-Appleista would agree is bad news for consumers. So, like you, I hope Apple lose this case and the whole market can move on…

well we don't know much about the precise details of this case, but i do know a bit more about levi's in particular actually so we could use that as an example and comparison

levi's don't own a trademark as you say, thus other people can make jeans that look pretty generic and similar to the same jeans levi makes. what we take from that is that the ruling here isn't that someone can't make a rectangular or square touch screen tablet that you can hold in your hand

levi's own a number of patents such as having the “red tab” on the back of the jeans. levi's patent is for a tab on a particular pocket on the jean, and in any colour. thus why levis have silver tab, orange tab etc, that's specifically so no-one else can use a tab with say “pepe” so from a slight distance it looks like someone is wearing levis. they also have the pocket stitching designs and a bunch of other things. what we can take from that, is it's the placement of certain aspects that apple have the rights too, thus by moving those items elsewhere, such as from the side to the top or the back, you could create a tablet without infringing

if you look at it from an outsider, as a judge should do, apple have spent a lot of money developing a product for others to copy, without spending that money on development, yet eating into apples sales. is that really fair?

of course it's great for the consumer if we can have cheaper options, but so far we don't. we have alternative products around the same price that aren't really any better, such as the galaxy tab, or we have cheap crap that few people want. it's not like the galaxy tab is half the price of the ipad and still does all the same basic functions. samsung haven't really created something for the people to get onto the tablet market with. the overwhelming majority of people who want a tablet who have that level of funds to spare have choose the ipad. of those who haven't bought an ipad, i'd say the overwhelming majority just want something cheaper that works well and wouldn't mind if it wasn't apple branded if they saved money. but samsung haven't provided that. and android is hardly to ios what windows is to osx. whilst many people say they like android, i'd say ios was better, whilst i'm very much a windows man over osx. stick windows on a reasonably priced tablet that works well, and you got me. as much as i like ios on my iphone, i'd rather have windows thankyouverymuch on a tablet over anything else. osx might be nice on a tablet too, but they haven't yet agreed that we can sell our kidneys in the uk so that's a no go for me

semo
A few years ago I read about a study that showed how similar modern cars look. They took off the badges and all other recognisable trademark features such as the grilles. They found that most subjects couldn't id the car brands. 4 wheels, 4 doors, engine at the front, etc.

….

I take your point, but that's a different issue, isn't it? Cars are similar, as I understand it, because they come from the same design process, that being wind-tunnel testing and it's simply the case that basic shapes are determined by factors like aerodynamic efficiency, not least because it impacts on fuel efficiency.

And, as I said a post or two back, design rights and registered designs exclude “features dictated by technical function.”

If, for instance, Samsung could convincingly argue that button have to be that shape, that size and in that location, because that's where fingers will reach to, then they could argue that it's dictated by technical function, and Apple's case would, expensively, fail. But that's a big if.

So the issue, as I see it, is just how close to Apple's designs did Samsung get, and why? Hologram is dead right, it's a function of balance.

cameronlite
I'm not going to argue with you there! They are almost clones, visibly - but this isn't what they are using in their legal battle…



The fact is that you wouldn't put volume buttons that you use now and again on the front, and you certainly wouldn't put them on the back incase the table is on a surface. As for recessed buttons, i think that's too subtle a change to really distinguish between tablets and Apples design permit (or whatever it it :p)

Again, you wouldn't put buttons on the base, because if you're holding the tablet, your hands aren't usually on the base!

Regarding your laptop comment, draw a picture of a laptop shell and then tell me it doesn't represent almost every laptop. My point is: Apples tablet design that they are using in court is pretty much the definition of a sodding tablet, the same would be true if you drew a laptop shell.

as myself and others have mentioned, it's not the basic shape that's appears to be the problem, but more in the detail

of course you can put volume buttons and on and off buttons in the base that are recessed. how often do you need to use those buttons? i don't have an ipad but as far as i understand it's just a big iphone with the same buttons. so on the side you have on/off, volume and mute, and on the front the home button or whatever it's called. you typically turn these devices on or off rarely as they go into sleep mode, so you don't need the on/off switch to be instantly accessible all the time. same with the mute button, and same with the volume button. i rarely use those buttons at all on my iphone. the home button is the important one to get out out of apps

it's the same thing with laptops, it's not the basic idea of a portable computer with screen and keyboard that folds, it's more in the detail of look

uni
well we don't know much about the precise details of this case, but i do know a bit more about levi's in particular actually so we could use that as an example and comparison

levi's don't own a trademark as you say, thus other people can make jeans that look pretty generic and similar to the same jeans levi makes. what we take from that is that the ruling here isn't that someone can't make a rectangular or square touch screen tablet that you can hold in your hand

levi's own a number of patents such as having the “red tab” on the back of the jeans. levi's patent is for a tab on a particular pocket on the jean, and in any colour. thus why levis have silver tab, orange tab etc, that's specifically so no-one else can use a tab with say “pepe” so from a slight distance it looks like someone is wearing levis. they also have the pocket stitching designs and a bunch of other things. what we can take from that, is it's the placement of certain aspects that apple have the rights too, thus by moving those items elsewhere, such as from the side to the top or the back, you could create a tablet without infringing….

Levi's have patents, but I'll bet that that tab is not one of them. It might be a Trademark, but not a patent. Patent's are about inventions, processes etc, that involve inventive elements and are about how things work, what they're made of, and so forth. They're not about design fripperies or branding.

To be fair, this is a very common misconception, about the exact differences between copyright, patents, Trademarks and “design rights”. It's also about “passing off”. If you have a red tab in the same place that said “Lives”, or “Loves”, it might be regards as passing off. I seem to remember a shop getting a legal clobbering, some years ago, for Harrods, for using the name “Horrods”, but not just that (which would have been fair enough) but using the famous gold lettering on a dark green bag, and using the same typeface. It was close to inconceivable that it was coincidence, and was deemed (quite rightly, in my view) to be cynical exploitation of someone else's branding.

Saracen
Levi's have patents, but I'll bet that that tab is not one of them. It might be a Trademark, but not a patent. Patent's are about inventions, processes etc, that involve inventive elements and are about how things work, what they're made of, and so forth. They're not about design fripperies or branding.

To be fair, this is a very common misconception, about the exact differences between copyright, patents, Trademarks and “design rights”. It's also about “passing off”. If you have a red tab in the same place that said “Lives”, or “Loves”, it might be regards as passing off. I seem to remember a shop getting a legal clobbering, some years ago, for Harrods, for using the name “Horrods”, but not just that (which would have been fair enough) but using the famous gold lettering on a dark green bag, and using the same typeface. It was close to inconceivable that it was coincidence, and was deemed (quite rightly, in my view) to be cynical exploitation of someone else's branding.

whatever it was, they had many specific rights so people couldn't make cheap jeans that could fool people from a distance into looking like levis, with the red tab being the most obvious mark of those jeans to let people know you were wearing levis. it was a good few years ago when a levis rep explained all of this. it didn't really stop all the dodgy factories making fakes, but having seen a number of them you could tell easily as the quality was crap by comparison. if you weren't familiar with the products you wouldn't have something to measure the difference, but if you worked with the products it was easy to tell

a number of companies reguarly take action against people copying styles, mcdonalds in particular will sue anyone they can for having a company called MCsomething

uni
whatever it was, they had many specific rights so people couldn't make cheap jeans that could fool people from a distance into looking like levis, with the red tab being the most obvious mark of those jeans to let people know you were wearing levis. it was a good few years ago when a levis rep explained all of this. it didn't really stop all the dodgy factories making fakes, but having seen a number of them you could tell easily as the quality was crap by comparison. if you weren't familiar with the products you wouldn't have something to measure the difference, but if you worked with the products it was easy to tell

a number of companies reguarly take action against people copying styles, mcdonalds in particular will sue anyone they can for having a company called MCsomething

Oh sure, but is it not legitimate to protect your investment, whether you're Levi's, Harrods, Rolex, McD's ….. or Apple.

There's a range of events, though. On the one hand, there's sheer piracy, making cheap crap (like cigarettes, perfume, fake CD/DVDs etc) and pretending they're the legit product. On the other end, there's legit companies with legit products coming, allegedly, just a bit too close to someone else's design rights.

But …. there's a market for cheap, crappy Rolexes. Some people think it looks good, and either can't afford or won't pay for the real thing. Then there's fakes that are anything but cheap, but are such good replicas they're hard, or next to impossible, to tell from the real thing. But they're ALL exploiting Riolex's brand, because people are brand/fashion conscious, and may corporations exploit that hugely.

I don't blamer Levi's for taking action against cheap replicas, whenever they can. One reason will be that if people buy cheap fakes not realising they're fakes, the poor quality could damage Levi's brand, and image. Personally, I regard Levi pricing as outrageous, and I will not pay what they expect for a pair of jeans. I don;t care about “fashion”, and I don't care what other people think about what I'm wearing … which, right now, is a £3 pair of ASDA “George” jeans. I'm sure the fashion police regard that as a cardinal sin and a sign of a lack of taste and style, but that's fine, because I regard the fashion conscious that will pay Levi prices for a pair of jeans as pretentious idiots with far more money than sense. Each to his own.

But Levi's can only charge what they charge because of fashion, and branding, IMHO. So naturally, they want to protect the namer, brand and fashion image.

As do Apple.

Part of the culture of Apple is users being seen as (or think they're seen as, depending on your perspective) as “cool”, or whatever the current in-vogue expression is, because they've got an Apple, being it iPhone, iPod, or iWhatever. That's partly about logos, hence the distinctive Apple logo on, most products, but it's also about recognisability at a glance, and that is about shape, appearance, design. Hence (IMHO) this case.

I don't think it's about Apple wanting to monopolise the market. They know, for an absolute certainty, they aren't going to do that. It is about getting as large a slice of the premium end of the market as they can, and part of that is about a distinctive “at-a-glance” design that confers that supposedly iconic status to their products. In other words, they want premium products at a premium price, and they don't want that iconic cachet undercut by products from others that are hard to tell apart from their “iconic” products.

Saracen
I don't think it's about Apple wanting to monopolise the market. They know, for an absolute certainty, they aren't going to do that.

Whilst that's true, if you had the opportunity to keep a market for yourself you'd do it - even if it wasn't long term.

I like the jeans analogy - although nobody seems to have suggested putting the buttons on the rear..

dangel
I like the jeans analogy - although nobody seems to have suggested putting the buttons on the rear..

Apple don't make jeans, but if they did, they'd just work - unlike our current jeans of course.

It's also because nobody is stupid enough to sacrifice being able to put on your jeans without requiring a carer because somebody else came up with a capable idea first.

Saracen
I don't think it's about Apple wanting to monopolise the market. They know, for an absolute certainty, they aren't going to do that. It is about getting as large a slice of the premium end of the market as they can, and part of that is about a distinctive “at-a-glance” design that confers that supposedly iconic status to their products. In other words, they want premium products at a premium price, and they don't want that iconic cachet undercut by products from others that are hard to tell apart from their “iconic” products.

I don't have a problem with Apple trying to protect “their look” - e.g. if Samsung made a phone that was a visual clone of iPhone4 then fine, I'd be quite content if Apple wanted to sue the pants off them. Similarly with the tablet - if we're talking about the tablet form factor device with the chrome/black surround, thin, single large button on the front and a smooth, curved mono-colour back - then that screams “iPad” to me. So if you've got Samsung, Motorola etc doing the same then fine fire away - sue the blighters! What I do have a problem with is with Apple trying to grab the entire “modern” tablet form factor - i.e. any thin, portable, rectangular, keyboard-less , battery-powered, network-capable, computing device - as their exclusive purview - yes, they did popularize the device family, but that's no justification for the legal strong-arming against all others that they seem to be aiming at.

Saracen
If, for instance, Samsung could convincingly argue that button have to be that shape, that size and in that location, because that's where fingers will reach to, then they could argue that it's dictated by technical function, and Apple's case would, expensively, fail. But that's a big if.

I'd like to see Apple fail on this “technical function” caveat - but like you I think it unlikely. That said - although my knowledge in this area is microscopic, didn't there used to be (in UK at least) some benchmark where it was whether the man-in-the-street could distinguish? If a “commoner” could distinguish the two products, then the defence wins, otherwise the offending product is regarded as a “clone”. And yes, I fully realise that this is the EU, so lord-only knows what yardstick is being applied.

cameronlite
Apple don't make jeans, but if they did, they'd just work - unlike our current jeans of course. It's also because nobody is stupid enough to sacrifice being able to put on your jeans without requiring a carer because somebody else came up with a capable idea first.

Hmm, my jeans work fine. Based on my experience with Apple's testicle, sorry “technical”, support so far if they made jeans I think a kilt would start to appeal…
… although if the current spell o' weather continues then I think an investment in a websuit would be more appropriate.

Saracen
That's not what they're fighting over, though. It's the design, not the functionality. At least, as I understand it, it is.

Indeed, I'm just saying that if Apple is accusing Samsung of damaging its sales and/or brand by copying, the entirety of the offending product should be considered.

crossy
if we're talking about the tablet form factor device with the chrome/black surround, thin, single large button on the front and a smooth, curved mono-colour back - then that screams “iPad” to me. So if you've got Samsung, Motorola etc doing the same then fine fire away - sue the blighters!

I seem to be missing something massive here.

Single large front button:
- logical, appeals to both left and right handed people
- smooth, curved, mono-colour back, instead of a rainbow coloured back? Mono makes sense really! I must admit, i do prefer the back of my tablets to be hard and jagged. Certainly not smooth and curved, heavens no.
- chrome edging, alright, you can have that one….
- thin! thin! How can thin scream iPad to you?

The only thing you have is the chrome surround - everything else if just plain logical.

dangel
Whilst that's true, if you had the opportunity to keep a market for yourself you'd do it - even if it wasn't long term.

….

That depends how you define “market”.

There's often more than one market for a product type. For instance, a Cross fountain pen and a BIC. Or a cheap Casio from a market and a Patek Philippe. One product strategy is pile ‘em high, sell ’em cheap. You don't make much profit per unit, but you sell a LOT of units. Another strategy is to be up-market, premium, exclusive. There's a reason why BMW produce M-series in limited numbers. I bought an M3 as one of the last available in a production run. No more were made for many months. If, for instance, Rolex were go go after cornering the market, they might produce a lot of watches in the short term, but they'd destroy the image of Rolex as an aspirational product permanently.

Apple are after that somewhat premium sector, which while still shifting in serious volume, is NOT aimed at the stack ‘em high in a corner of ASDA philosophy. They’re after the iconic fashion status of a “must have” device, the tech version of Rolex marketing. They don't (IMHO) want to devalue that iconic status for short-term gain, when they know that played right, it's a status that will last for years and years, perhaps permanently. They want the brand recognition of a Rolls Royce or Rolex, and that not only means not flooding the market themselves, but preventing anyone else from flooding the market with look-alikes.

And sure, they'll sell as many as they can make and shift …. on their terms. Those terms include premium pricing, because it ensures margins are very healthy.

So yes, they want the market to themselves, but their market is the premium end of tablets, smartphones, etc, not shifting boxes in bulk but cutting prices and hence margins to the bone. It's about maximising profit, long-term, not about short-term success at the expense of long-term potential for milking us over and over again for the latest must-have gadget.

And millions of us fall for it, as evidenced by the number of people that upgrade a perfectly function device for the latest model because it's the latest model. I remember looking at a year-old Ferrari, with under 1500 miles on the clock. The owner had replaced it because the reg plate had last year's letter on it, so he ordered a new one (every year) for August 1st delivery. That's an extreme example, but it's Apple philosophy …. high margins, iconic status fashion technology.

Scott B;2110308
Indeed, I'm just saying that if Apple is accusing Samsung of damaging its sales and/or brand by copying, the entirety of the offending product should be considered.

I'd say it's more like Rolex trying to take replicas off the market, but not trying to prevent Patek Philippe from marketing world-class watches (and, as far as I'm concerned, better quality ones than Rolex).

And, after all, the functionality of any watch (*) is pretty similar. It tells the time. And the design criteria are limited, too …. dial, hands, a knob or two too wind and/or adjust time, and a strap with some sort of catch.

But within those criteria, there's a vast array of designs.

Sure, you can buy a relatively cheap analog watch with a cheap movement, or you can buy that Patek Philippe with a world class movement. It's like the Apple/Android argument - what's going on inside isn't the issue, it's the appearance, the external design that's in dispute. Rolex and Patek Philippe (and many others) manage to make devices as simple, in terms of functionality, as a watch, with huge variation in design and appearance, without tripping over each other's design rights. Why can't Samsung (according to Apple).

Personally, I have no opinion on whether Samsung have infringed design rights. I haven't studied either produce closely enough, and certainly haven't compared. But I can see Apple's point IF the Samsung product is really that close.

Nor am I exactly an Apple fan. For instance, I bought a Creative Labs Zen not an iPod for two reasons - musical quality, and that it wasn't Apple. For the same reason, I doubt I'd ever buy a Rolex.

Nonetheless, I can see Apple's reasoning and why they;d take action to protect their design right, and if the Samsung really is that close, I kinda blame Samsung for cutting it too close.

I still hope, though, as I said earlier, that Apple fail.

(*) I'm talking conventional, analog, not digital.

Saracen
That depends how you define “market”.

I don't think that changes what I said - in fact I agree with your definition - but Sammy et al are all trying to enter the very same market - their tablets are very similarly priced and they're looking for the same profit. The cost to them of closing the door is minimal right now - both monetarily and in terms of the perception of their brand (just look how people jump and and defend Apple like they were a dear family member) is a drop in the ocean. Premium products they may be, but they are indeed shifting many, many boxes at the same time - one has to admire them having the ability to do both.

You can buy cheap tablets - but they're crap - and hence why Apple sees them as no threat.

I still think this will be thrown out in time nonetheless (given the evidence thus far presented the whole thing seems farcical).

Saracen
Sure, you can buy a relatively cheap analog watch with a cheap movement, or you can buy that Patek Philippe with a world class movement. It's like the Apple/Android argument - what's going on inside isn't the issue, it's the appearance, the external design that's in dispute. Rolex and Patek Philippe (and many others) manage to make devices as simple, in terms of functionality, as a watch, with huge variation in design and appearance, without tripping over each other's design rights. Why can't Samsung (according to Apple).

A) Apple's design rights in this case are far too vague
B) There are far more things you can customize on a watch without reducing the usability of it, with tablets you are far more limited

Saracen
I'd say it's more like Rolex trying to take replicas off the market, but not trying to prevent Patek Philippe from marketing world-class watches (and, as far as I'm concerned, better quality ones than Rolex).

But surely this is more analogous to the latter of your examples. Samsung, Moto and co aren't trying to deceive people into thinking they're buying an Apple product, but they are using what is the clearly optimal form-factor.

Scott B;2110329
But surely this is more analogous to the latter of your examples. Samsung, Moto and co aren't trying to deceive people into thinking they're buying an Apple product, but they are using what is the clearly optimal form-factor.

As I understand it, I'd agree that they're certainly not “pirating”, i.e. pretending their product actually is an Apple product, but it seems that Apple are claiming they have followed Apple designs closely enough to appear to be very similar. If you have an iconic product and someone introduces something that is close enough to be taking advantage of that iconic style, then arguably, it's actionable.

Consider the example I gave earlier of the “Horrods” store bag. By copying the colour scheme and typeface of Harrods, they were, if you like, trying to ride on Harrods coattails, trying to impart a sense of cachet to their product by a psychological linkage to Harrods.

I can see a major battleground between Samsung and Apple being in the area of what is “features dictated by technical function.”

If, for instance, buttons are placed where they are for that reason, it's not protectable. But if Apple have just designed a user interface that, by virtue of clever design, just feels right and works well, then it is.

dangel
I don't think that changes what I said - in fact I agree with your definition - but Sammy et al are all trying to enter the very same market - their tablets are very similarly priced and they're looking for the same profit. The cost to them of closing the door is minimal right now - both monetarily and in terms of the perception of their brand (just look how people jump and and defend Apple like they were a dear family member) is a drop in the ocean. Premium products they may be, but they are indeed shifting many, many boxes at the same time - one has to admire them having the ability to do both.

You can buy cheap tablets - but they're crap - and hence why Apple sees them as no threat.

I still think this will be thrown out in time nonetheless (given the evidence thus far presented the whole thing seems farcical).

My comment was in relation to suggestions (maybe not by you) about Apple wanting the whole market, and your comment

“Whilst that's true, if you had the opportunity to keep a market for yourself you'd do it - even if it wasn't long term. ”

I'd agree that if Apple can get 100% of their target market, they'd love to. I'd also agree that Sammy and Moto aren't going after the cheap end.

But that's why Apple won't want Sammy/Moto etc taking advantage of their IP-protected design.

Ultimately, it comes down to there being IP protections for designs, which may or may not apply in this case. If they do, Apple are entitled to protect therm, but if they don't, they should lost and that could be very expensive, because amongst other things,. is Samsung are injuncted from selling for a year or more, and Apple lose, they're on the hook for compensation for those lost sales and arguably, lost market position too. It's a high-stakes gamble to take an action like this, if you aren't very confident of your case.

crossy
I don't have a problem with Apple trying to protect “their look” - e.g. if Samsung made a phone that was a visual clone of iPhone4 then fine, I'd be quite content if Apple wanted to sue the pants off them. Similarly with the tablet - if we're talking about the tablet form factor device with the chrome/black surround, thin, single large button on the front and a smooth, curved mono-colour back - then that screams “iPad” to me. So if you've got Samsung, Motorola etc doing the same then fine fire away - sue the blighters! What I do have a problem with is with Apple trying to grab the entire “modern” tablet form factor - i.e. any thin, portable, rectangular, keyboard-less , battery-powered, network-capable, computing device - as their exclusive purview - yes, they did popularize the device family, but that's no justification for the legal strong-arming against all others that they seem to be aiming at.

I'd like to see Apple fail on this “technical function” caveat - but like you I think it unlikely. That said - although my knowledge in this area is microscopic, didn't there used to be (in UK at least) some benchmark where it was whether the man-in-the-street could distinguish? If a “commoner” could distinguish the two products, then the defence wins, otherwise the offending product is regarded as a “clone”. And yes, I fully realise that this is the EU, so lord-only knows what yardstick is being applied.

Hmm, my jeans work fine. Based on my experience with Apple's testicle, sorry “technical”, support so far if they made jeans I think a kilt would start to appeal…
… although if the current spell o' weather continues then I think an investment in a websuit would be more appropriate.

apparently apple are taking action against samsung for at least two phones that look like the iphone, i think the galaxy S and something else, from what i read

i'm not sure why everyone is so hung up about a single button though. if apple had that right and no-one else could make a tablet with a single button on the front, what do you think manufacturers would do? stick 2 or 3 buttons on. top and bottom or left and right. these are pretty easy changes to the design that wouldn't stop funtion. stick 5 bottons on. a left right and middle on both top and bottom. let users map them to be volume, mute, home or have combinations like the tablet equivilent of right clicking etc. hold two buttons for on and off. no need for side buttons

regarding jeans with buttons on the back, you guys are forgetting kriss kross aren't you. i tried to forget them too!

actually levis used to put rivets on the back pockets on jeans but they got complaints from schools that the rivets would scratch wooden chairs so they removed them. button flys are often covered, but not always. and who needs buttons when you got zips or a velcro fly like ZZ top? just more ways that you can use a bit of thought and make a design a little bit different to set yourself apart from others

cameronlite
I seem to be missing something massive here.
Single large front button:
- logical, appeals to both left and right handed people
- smooth, curved, mono-colour back, instead of a rainbow coloured back? Mono makes sense really! I must admit, i do prefer the back of my tablets to be hard and jagged. Certainly not smooth and curved, heavens no.
- chrome edging, alright, you can have that one….
- thin! thin! How can thin scream iPad to you?
The only thing you have is the chrome surround - everything else if just plain logical.

Front button is irrelevant - Honeycomb tablets (or at least the two I tried, plus the one I own) automatically flip the screen the right way if you turn them upside down. So buttons on left or right isn't a big deal. Personally I prefer the side buttons anyway, they fall under finger easier, plus you don't have that face button staring at you like a cyclop's eye - but that's just my preference. ;)

Agree with the smooth back - it's just a bl**dy fingerprint magnet - I much prefer a nice grippy texture. A rare design “fail” perhaps?

The thinness bit isn't me - it's Apple - look at their ad's and you'll see that they claim "Thinner, lighter, faster, …". Check http://www.apple.com/uk/ipad/ if you don't believe me. Personally I don't regard wafer thinness as a big plus - I prefer something with a little “heft” so it's easier to hold.

All of this is further proof that humanity has become a disgrace to itself.

aidanjt
All of this is further proof that humanity has become a disgrace to itself.

Still, look on the bright side eh? :clapping:

This post is interesting:

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=19809815&postcount=68

CAT-THE-FIFTH
This post is interesting:

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=19809815&postcount=68

just because they displayed them first doesn't mean apple still don't hold the patents. the patents could be much older. some of the chinese factories can copy things incredibly fast

steve jobs said he started working on the ipad before the iphone, and that was 2007. apple also had one of the first tablet type devices with the epic failure that was the apple newton. i actually remember promo girls who had these at the time and it was the first time someone had something that diverted my attention away from the girls. an incredbible device at the time, but pretty unnecessary. i had an early psion organiser. was about the same weight as a 3.5" HD but held about 8k. yup 8k not 8mb or 8gb. had a 2 line display and ran spreadsheets, on 2 lines!

Patent laws have this little thing called ‘prior art’, nor do they apply to designs.

CAT-THE-FIFTH
This post is interesting:http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=19809815&postcount=68

Yes, that is an interesting posting. :)

uni
just because they displayed them first doesn't mean apple still don't hold the patents. the patents could be much older. some of the chinese factories can copy things incredibly fast

Hmm, not convinced that copying is necessarily the only answer. It's pretty obvious that if you give a couple of separate design teams a similar brief each, and a restricted set of components, that you'll end up with very similar designs. There are, of course, exceptions to this rule - like the IBM butterfly keyboard, etc.

uni
regarding jeans with buttons on the back, you guys are forgetting kriss kross aren't you.

I'd love to forget kk - he's my brother… seriously! (different spelling of course) :secret:

crossy
Yes, that is an interesting posting. :)

Hmm, not convinced that copying is necessarily the only answer. It's pretty obvious that if you give a couple of separate design teams a similar brief each, and a restricted set of components, that you'll end up with very similar designs. There are, of course, exceptions to this rule - like the IBM butterfly keyboard, etc.

I'd love to forget kk - he's my brother… seriously! (different spelling of course) :secret:

but the designers aren't given a lego set and asked to make something. the restrictions would be budgetary rather than using specific components, and it's not like the inside parts will be the same, it's more the external look and the way they work that's the problem for apple. in fact the ipad copies sometimes have better technical specs, more ram or faster processor but you can't tell that by looking t them

Think the general feeling here is Apple is in the wrong unless you actually own Apple to which your feelings will be to defend them no matter what.

Yes there are copies out there ones which look like they have been made to look exactly like the iPad may with cheaper materials but these don't sell as generally they are not as good yet Apple leave them alone. Theres only one reason why they are after Samsung and its not because their Tab resembles a similar shape and design.

uni
just because they displayed them first doesn't mean apple still don't hold the patents. the patents could be much older. some of the chinese factories can copy things incredibly fast

READ THE POST BEFORE ANSWERING NEXT TIME!!

Many of the tablets are from well known companies who displayed the designs BEFORE APPLE even ANNOUNCED let alone DISPLAYED the iPAD design.

On top of this your prior arguments are irrelevant as it means these designs were not copied from Apple but were produced independently. The whole crux of Apple's argument is the“they copied us” mantra.

Want to see how “original” the iPad design is??

Original iPad patent drawings.



Guess which one was shown in 1994 in the Knightrider movie?? ;)



Tablet in 2001:A Space Odyssey which was made in 1968. But before the film was shown to the public, people made designs for the film you know!! ;)



I have worked in science and it is not un-heard of for similar discoveries and inventions to be made independently of each other within a short period. If you have multiple teams working on the same problem then in many cases this can happen.

Paulm@scan;2110594
Think the general feeling here is Apple is in the wrong unless you actually own Apple to which your feelings will be to defend them no matter what.

Its nothing but classic flip-flop TBH. I even know mates who own Apple products who agree with the sentiment Apple are taking the mickey.

CAT-THE-FIFTH
READ THE POST BEFORE ANSWERING NEXT TIME!!

Many of the tablets are from well known companies who displayed the designs BEFORE APPLE even ANNOUNCED let alone DISPLAYED the iPAD design.

On top of this your prior arguments are irrelevant as it means these designs were not copied from Apple but were produced independently. The whole crux of Apple's argument is the“they copied us” mantra.

Want to see how “original” the iPad design is??

Original iPad patent drawings.



Tablet in 2001:A Space Odyssey which was made in 1968. But before the film was shown to the public, people made designs for the film you know!! ;)



I have worked in science and it is not un-heard of for similar discoveries and inventions to be made independently of each other within a short period. If you have multiple teams working on the same problem then in many cases this can happen.



Its nothing but classic flip-flop TBH. I even know mates who own Apple products who agree with the sentiment Apple are taking the mickey.

i did read your post and the link, thus the reply. did you read it yourself and checked the dates?

apple were working on the ipad before the iphone. rumours of the ipad were around for a long time before it was announced, so pretty easy for other quick bandwagon jumpers to make tablets. did you notice how the other early tablets looked less like the ipad than current tablets? because they didn't have anything firm to copy from, but they copied the idea of tablets, as before the apple rumours few people wanted to make them

so just because they came out first doesn't mean apple don't hold patents

uni
i did read your post and the link, thus the reply. did you read it yourself and checked the dates?
apple were working on the ipad before the iphone. rumours of the ipad were around for a long time before it was announced, so pretty easy for other quick bandwagon jumpers to make tablets. did you notice how the other early tablets looked less like the ipad than current tablets? because they didn't have anything firm to copy from, but they copied the idea of tablets, as before the apple rumours few people wanted to make them

so just because they came out first doesn't mean apple don't hold patents

Fail.

uni
i did read your post and the link, thus the reply. did you read it yourself and checked the dates?

apple were working on the ipad before the iphone. rumours of the ipad were around for a long time before it was announced, so pretty easy for other quick bandwagon jumpers to make tablets. did you notice how the other early tablets looked less like the ipad than current tablets? because they didn't have anything firm to copy from, but they copied the idea of tablets, as before the apple rumours few people wanted to make them

so just because they came out first doesn't mean apple don't hold patents

This is simply invalid. Just because there were rumours of the ipad doesn't mean people copied the idea of tablets. Microsoft made tablets, so people couldn't possibly have copied the ‘idea’ of tablets from a rumour that Apple were going to make one.

The term tablet (with reference to tablet computing) was coined in 2002 when Microsoft released the first capable digital pen devices.

uni
but the designers aren't given a lego set and asked to make something. the restrictions would be budgetary rather than using specific components, and it's not like the inside parts will be the same, it's more the external look and the way they work that's the problem for apple. in fact the ipad copies sometimes have better technical specs, more ram or faster processor but you can't tell that by looking t them

I didn't say that they were given a lego set - merely that there's only a limited number of suitable components. For example, check out the list of processors used in the tablets and you'll notice that it's pretty much an ARM-only deal (Snapdragon, etc). Likewise with screens, RAM, (flash) storage, camera modules, etc.

Next, PLEASE STOP calling anything that's not an iPad an "iPad clone" - at least unless you've got proof that the other companies did actually copy the iPad… In which case do you not think that Apple would be launching a broadside of writs? They aren't, (merely persecuting Samsung and latterly Motorola), so I'll gently suggest that this is because there's no case to answer.

Check out the pics that Cat-The-Fifth has kindly put in - these show “prior art” for the basic design. As he says:

CAT-THE-FIFTH
Many of the tablets are from well known companies who displayed the designs BEFORE APPLE even ANNOUNCED let alone DISPLAYED the iPAD design. On top of this your prior arguments are irrelevant as it means these designs were not copied from Apple but were produced independently. The whole crux of Apple's argument is the“they copied us” mantra.

I couldn't sum it up better! :D

So, by all means give Apple credit where it's due - they certainly deserve it for not trying to shoehorn a desktop OS into their tablets, and for their superb promotion of the genre. And there's other phone-related stuff that they've carried over (like the simple method to add applications) that also deserve fulsome praise. Yay Apple!
:thumbsup:

However, they did not “invent” the modern tablet form factor. The fact that they appear to be trying to claim they did is mendacity, if not down right evil (although they're still less evil than Oracle imho) in my book.

uni
i did read your post and the link, thus the reply. did you read it yourself and checked the dates?

apple were working on the ipad before the iphone. rumours of the ipad were around for a long time before it was announced, so pretty easy for other quick bandwagon jumpers to make tablets. did you notice how the other early tablets looked less like the ipad than current tablets? because they didn't have anything firm to copy from, but they copied the idea of tablets, as before the apple rumours few people wanted to make them

so just because they came out first doesn't mean apple don't hold patents

I'm not really sure what to add to the guys above Uni, as you clearly haven't read Cats post or answered the points he makes.

If Apple were working on the iPad before the iPad is irrelevant. The pad based format has been around as an idea for almost as long as home computers themselves through either (what appears to be now) crazy prototypes or in science fiction (A Space Odyssey, Star Trek and so on)

Heck, my Palm (and other PDAs) computer used to do most of what the iPad can in terms of features: Touch screen, installable apps, network access (through serial :D) and so on….the iPad is nothing more than a faster more up to date version of old ideas.

The iPad is nothing special in terms of its tech, it just does certain tasks well for a specific set of people. The ban on the SGT is seriously worrying for the future of computing development. What's more worrying though is that Apple have got themselves in a position where people are people are willing to defend their actions. That's almost religious like in nature and is far more dangerous than people are giving credit to.

What they're essentially trying to do here, is pass off a form factor as an invention. Imagine if Intel tried to patent ATX, or Ford patented the wheel.. OMG HONDA LIKE TOTALLY RIPPED OFF OUR WHEEL DESIGN!!1!.. It's ridiculous. Companies should absolutely not be granted a patent on a product type.

aidanjt
What they're essentially trying to do here, is pass off a form factor as an invention. Imagine if Intel tried to patent ATX, or Ford patented the wheel.. OMG HONDA LIKE TOTALLY RIPPED OFF OUR WHEEL DESIGN!!1!.. It's ridiculous. Companies should absolutely not be granted a patent on a product type.

I think the governments of Iraq and the Republic of Dagestan will be having a word with Ford and Honda very soon. Their people had the wheel in development for at least 4000 years. It was so secret you need archaeologists to find the original documents too!! Everyone else has copied their hard work,the ungrateful gits!! Time to pay up!!

Edit!!

OMG!!

Apple just bought the Republic of Dagestan!!

They don't want to license the round design too!!

Looks like everyone will need to switch to square wheels now. Hexagonal wheels are not allowed as they look too similar to round wheels.

I just saw the design patent of Apple. First reaction is - you can argue any bloody thing looks like that. Second reaction, if you want to look closely and the actual design, the Samsung device doesn't like the one in the patent anyways.

This is ridiculous. I would like some competition in the tablet market please so we get more improvements!

CAT-THE-FIFTH
I think the governments of Iraq and the Republic of Dagestan will be having a word with Ford and Honda very soon. Their people had the wheel in development for at least 4000 years. It was so secret you need archaeologists to find the original documents too!! Everyone else has copied their hard work,the ungrateful gits!! Time to pay up!!

Edit!!

OMG!!

Apple just bought the Republic of Dagestan!!

They don't want to license the round design too!!

Looks like everyone will need to switch to square wheels now. Hexagonal wheels are not allowed as they look too similar to round wheels.

I assume they'll also be banning the hexagonal nuts that hold the square wheels on as well?

cameronlite
I assume they'll also be banning the hexagonal nuts that hold the square wheels on as well?

Yep. Turns out the bees have a patent on the shape.

CAT-THE-FIFTH
I think the governments of Iraq and the Republic of Dagestan will be having a word with Ford and Honda very soon. Their people had the wheel in development for at least 4000 years. It was so secret you need archaeologists to find the original documents too!! Everyone else has copied their hard work,the ungrateful gits!! Time to pay up!!

Edit!!

OMG!!

Apple just bought the Republic of Dagestan!!

They don't want to license the round design too!!

Looks like everyone will need to switch to square wheels now. Hexagonal wheels are not allowed as they look too similar to round wheels.

Yup. It's official, Moses and God conspired to ripped off Apple.

cameronlite
I assume they'll also be banning the hexagonal nuts that hold the square wheels on as well?

Agent
Yep. Turns out the bees have a patent on the shape.

Clever organisms those bees!! They made a bee-line to the patents office right after the creator gave them the divine inspiration.

aidanjt
Yup. It's official, Moses and God conspired to ripped off Apple.

Be careful, I heard that Apple is trying to patent the words Moses and God. The news on the grapevine is that Steve Jobs wants exclusive access to those words and these were in development by Apple since +1 seconds after the big bang using an advanced time manipulation device(Apple TM). It seems Steve Jobs went back in time to that point so he could get some peace and quiet and thought of the words. Actually,he thought of some words but they got there in the end.

There are grounds for Apple to patent words since Steve Jobs technically thought of the first ones at +1 seconds after the big bang. Bill Gates tried to out-do him but Windows is crap and he got there 1.00000000000006767868 seconds after the big bang. He thought of a single word too.

OM(All powerful being formally known as God but now we cannot use it since the word is patented)!!

Agent
I'm not really sure what to add to the guys above Uni, as you clearly haven't read Cats post or answered the points he makes.

If Apple were working on the iPad before the iPad is irrelevant. The pad based format has been around as an idea for almost as long as home computers themselves through either (what appears to be now) crazy prototypes or in science fiction (A Space Odyssey, Star Trek and so on)

Heck, my Palm (and other PDAs) computer used to do most of what the iPad can in terms of features: Touch screen, installable apps, network access (through serial :D) and so on….the iPad is nothing more than a faster more up to date version of old ideas.

The iPad is nothing special in terms of its tech, it just does certain tasks well for a specific set of people. The ban on the SGT is seriously worrying for the future of computing development. What's more worrying though is that Apple have got themselves in a position where people are people are willing to defend their actions. That's almost religious like in nature and is far more dangerous than people are giving credit to.

i actually read it in great detail, thus my post

as far as i'm concerned, those guys jumped on the bandwagon when they heard the rumours apple were making a tablet. you may remember so many years back those rumours were around for a while before ipad was announced, nevermind launched. so other companies had time to come out with a competiting device, and as you can see they vary from the ipad. yet since the ipad came out, almost all the competiting devices look like ipad clones rather than have their own identity like the pre ipad models. sure ipad wasn't a new idea, just the same as the ipod, but they made the market. the previous market was tiny but apple persuaded people to want to buy something they didn't need or want before

i don't think it's such a worrying problem if you consider what we have now. we don't have cheap ipad clones. we have cheap crap or we have clones that are the same price or similar. most people either want the original device, want a cheap copy or want a better alternative. the alternatives don't really fit into those categories. samsungs tablet is the same price as the entry level ipad as it turns out, and doesn't really give consumers any real advantage over ipad. had it been half the price for the exact same thing, then they would have a niche, but who wants to splash so much money on a copy of a device?

there have been tablets in the past and they were very different to ipad, so apple changed the genre a fair bit. i saw a dell the other day that was closer to the old tablets in that it was a laptop with a reversable display and touch screen. i also saw a thicker tablet that had no keyboard but ran win7 and linux, which sounded pretty cool but apparently wasn't that great to use. for £400 you should be able to expect a windows based tablet that works well. and if someone can come up with that, it could potentially be an ipad killer, as it would run all existing applications

i just don't understand why microsoft (EDIT - put apple by mistake previsouly!) haven't waded into the tablet market and made a big splash. same with the smartphone market. they managed to wade into the games console market and become neck in neck if not leader compared to the playstation, so with all their might why can't they do it with tablets? even if they only create the software like android, surely they could create systems that manufacturers want to use

uni
i actually read it in great detail, thus my post

as far as i'm concerned, those guys jumped on the bandwagon when they heard the rumours apple were making a tablet. you may remember so many years back those rumours were around for a while before ipad was announced, nevermind launched. so other companies had time to come out with a competiting device, and as you can see they vary from the ipad. yet since the ipad came out, almost all the competiting devices look like ipad clones rather than have their own identity like the pre ipad models. sure ipad wasn't a new idea, just the same as the ipod, but they made the market. the previous market was tiny but apple persuaded people to want to buy something they didn't need or want before

i don't think it's such a worrying problem if you consider what we have now. we don't have cheap ipad clones. we have cheap crap or we have clones that are the same price or similar. most people either want the original device, want a cheap copy or want a better alternative. the alternatives don't really fit into those categories. samsungs tablet is the same price as the entry level ipad as it turns out, and doesn't really give consumers any real advantage over ipad. had it been half the price for the exact same thing, then they would have a niche, but who wants to splash so much money on a copy of a device?

there have been tablets in the past and they were very different to ipad, so apple changed the genre a fair bit. i saw a dell the other day that was closer to the old tablets in that it was a laptop with a reversable display and touch screen. i also saw a thicker tablet that had no keyboard but ran win7 and linux, which sounded pretty cool but apparently wasn't that great to use. for £400 you should be able to expect a windows based tablet that works well. and if someone can come up with that, it could potentially be an ipad killer, as it would run all existing applications

i just don't understand why apple haven't waded into the tablet market and made a big splash. same with the smartphone market. they managed to wade into the games console market and become neck in neck if not leader compared to the playstation, so with all their might why can't they do it with tablets? even if they only create the software like android, surely they could create systems that manufacturers want to use

I would appreciate it if you would stop talking out of your poo-hole. Although I don't particularly expect you to, and equally it is not worth me writing a useful reply since it is not possible to reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into. :censored:

when will IBM and microsoft weigh in and go after Apple?

IBM had a tablet in the 1990`s (as did RM as well) and of course , microsoft had one about 10 years ago.

edit:

samsung Q1 ultra - on sale early 2007 m using windows xp as the os , and rectangluar , black bezel with buttons and a touch screen

uni
as far as i'm concerned, those guys jumped on the bandwagon when they heard the rumours apple were making a tablet. you may remember so many years back those rumours were around for a while before ipad was announced, nevermind launched. so other companies had time to come out with a competiting device, and as you can see they vary from the ipad. yet since the ipad came out, almost all the competiting devices look like ipad clones rather than have their own identity like the pre ipad models. sure ipad wasn't a new idea, just the same as the ipod, but they made the market. the previous market was tiny but apple persuaded people to want to buy something they didn't need or want before

NO, THEY BL**DY AREN'T CLONES! Please take off the Apple-shaped glasses and actually take a look and you'll see that Iconia != iPad; Transformer != iPad; etc. :wallbash: I will grant that the Galaxy Tab does look a little like the iPad, which is why I wasn't sure that the Apple case is 100% crap. (Maybe 98-99% perhaps?) ;)

uni
i don't think it's such a worrying problem if you consider what we have now. we don't have cheap ipad clones. we have cheap crap or we have clones that are the same price or similar. most people either want the original device, want a cheap copy or want a better alternative. the alternatives don't really fit into those categories. samsungs tablet is the same price as the entry level ipad as it turns out, and doesn't really give consumers any real advantage over ipad. had it been half the price for the exact same thing, then they would have a niche, but who wants to splash so much money on a copy of a device?

He called them ‘clones’ and ‘copies’ again - aaaarrrgggghhhhh! :censored:
Big advantage of the Galaxy Tab, Iconia, Transformer, etc is that iPad (so I'm told) has to be connected to iTunes at least once to register, (and I'm also told that it needs to do that for firmware updates). The “clones” (as you call them) are quite capable of operating as standalone devices - my Asus has never been connected to my Windows7 PC, (despite me putting the “support” software on it), and it's working just fine - including moving from Android 3.1 to 3.2.

uni
there have been tablets in the past and they were very different to ipad, so apple changed the genre a fair bit. i saw a dell the other day that was closer to the old tablets in that it was a laptop with a reversable display and touch screen. i also saw a thicker tablet that had no keyboard but ran win7 and linux, which sounded pretty cool but apparently wasn't that great to use. for £400 you should be able to expect a windows based tablet that works well. and if someone can come up with that, it could potentially be an ipad killer, as it would run all existing applications

Aye the Dell Inspiron Duo - by the way Dell regard it as a convertable netbook - is very clever, but not a true tablet, they've got the Dell Streak for that. Windows 7 tablet? I'm not convinced - after all we've had Windows tablets in the past, and they've been less than successful. Even BillG has been quoted as saying that…

uni
i just don't understand why microsoft (EDIT - put apple by mistake previsouly!) haven't waded into the tablet market and made a big splash. same with the smartphone market. they managed to wade into the games console market and become neck in neck if not leader compared to the playstation, so with all their might why can't they do it with tablets? even if they only create the software like android, surely they could create systems that manufacturers want to use

Hmm, a valid point. Problem is that - to date at least - Microsoft has insists on putting a tweaked full blown Windows on a tablet. And therein lies the genius of Apple - instead of trying to shoehorn OSX, they put an expanded iOS in there. So maybe, just maybe, we could see a Microsoft tablet in 2-3 years time - this time running an enhanced Windows7-Phone, or maybe even the vaunted “tablet” edition of Windows8, (which seems to be very tablet-friendly from the gen so far). Let's be honest here - Apple managed to do iOS+ for iPad, Google managed to stretch Android for their tablets, so it's inconceivable that Microsoft don't have the “smarts” to do the same. (And I'm a Linux fan, so praising Microsoft doesn't come easy - although Win7 was pretty good).

crossy
NO, THEY BL**DY AREN'T CLONES! Please take off the Apple-shaped glasses and actually take a look and you'll see that Iconia != iPad; Transformer != iPad; etc. :wallbash: I will grant that the Galaxy Tab does look a little like the iPad, which is why I wasn't sure that the Apple case is 100% crap. (Maybe 98-99% perhaps?) ;)

He called them ‘clones’ and ‘copies’ again - aaaarrrgggghhhhh! :censored:
Big advantage of the Galaxy Tab, Iconia, Transformer, etc is that iPad (so I'm told) has to be connected to iTunes at least once to register, (and I'm also told that it needs to do that for firmware updates). The “clones” (as you call them) are quite capable of operating as standalone devices - my Asus has never been connected to my Windows7 PC, (despite me putting the “support” software on it), and it's working just fine - including moving from Android 3.1 to 3.2.

Aye the Dell Inspiron Duo - by the way Dell regard it as a convertable netbook - is very clever, but not a true tablet, they've got the Dell Streak for that. Windows 7 tablet? I'm not convinced - after all we've had Windows tablets in the past, and they've been less than successful. Even BillG has been quoted as saying that…

Hmm, a valid point. Problem is that - to date at least - Microsoft has insists on putting a tweaked full blown Windows on a tablet. And therein lies the genius of Apple - instead of trying to shoehorn OSX, they put an expanded iOS in there. So maybe, just maybe, we could see a Microsoft tablet in 2-3 years time - this time running an enhanced Windows7-Phone, or maybe even the vaunted “tablet” edition of Windows8, (which seems to be very tablet-friendly from the gen so far). Let's be honest here - Apple managed to do iOS+ for iPad, Google managed to stretch Android for their tablets, so it's inconceivable that Microsoft don't have the “smarts” to do the same. (And I'm a Linux fan, so praising Microsoft doesn't come easy - although Win7 was pretty good).

not needing connecting to itunes is a BIG advantage? really? i think you are vastly over exaggerating there. if you really don't have a pc of any kind and can't get access to one i'm sure the store you buy it from will activate it for you, being a £400+ sale. when i had to return my iphone4 the day after launch they gave me a new one and activated it for me so i didn't have to wait till i got home. it just takes a few seconds to do it

on a similar note, whilst it's not been mentioned here so much, i've heard people bang on about the locked down nature of iphone and ipad, but jailbreaking gets you out of that. whilst the same people who love android are faced with all sorts of measures to update and get things working, depending on make and model. nearly every day i read about another hack to get one “old” (old being just a few months old) device to update to the latest android, or so you can update before your manufacturer gets round to fixing it for your device. you either do that or you can be stuck with an old version of the software. whilst itunes is a complete pain in the arse, it does make updating firmware relatively simple and you get regular updates that work without any mucking about. i think that whilst itunes is something people don't like, it is probably easier to update for the layman. and if you know what you are doing it's easy to disable all the crap and just run what you want when you want, like i do

the dell streak? at least the 5" model has been dropped. i'm not sure about the rest. it's the same problem as the galaxy tab and xoom though, it's too expensive and doesn't do anything notable that the ipad doesn't, so again the question as to why spend that money for a clone or copy instead of the real thing

a couple of reasons why MS might be delaying is that they aren't doing too well on the phone front, so perhaps trying to sort that before diving into another market. also they are primarily a software company so may prefer to make the OS and let others deliver the hardware. whilst they have the biggest selling OS in windows, they never entered the pc market as far as i'm aware. and if i'm not aware of that it obviously couldn't have done too well. they gave up on zune too, so perhaps don't want a zap pad to flop too. from what we hear about win 8 it sounds like they may have it for tablets and phones as well as desktops, which sounds great if it works. osx has kind of done a similar thing with lion with the app store (which is pretty cool actually) and making it a bit more ios like

i'm still strongly in the windows camp though, and i prefer xp over vista and win7. win7 is a bit too osx simplified for me. i think that's great for a phone, and maybe great for most computer users that just want to do internet and videos and music or use MS Office or specific apps, but it's too dumbed down for me. or worse, you have to struggle to find where they've hidden everything to make it look neater

Chaps…

Lets get a sense of perspective - it is a gadget - and while one has a perceived advantage over another for one group of users, the reverse is true for another. Get over it!

And two multinationals are doing what multinationals are required to do - maximising profits for their shareolders by bringing products to the market place and protectnig their interests.

So - with that in mind, lets keep the discussion in more temperate tones - and if you can't agree - at least agree to disagree! :)

But Peter, Apple suck! :p

kopite
But Peter, Apple suck! :p

So do straws! :heckle:

Straws… That reminds me of frappucinos. Which means starbucks. BRB Coffee :D

kopite
Straws… That reminds me of frappucinos. Which means starbucks. BRB Coffee :D

Starbucks????? The evil empire themselves - there is only one coffee and that is Costa Coffee - I'm fed up with blatant Starbucks fanboyism… I wouldn't put it past them to bring an action against Costa for copying the concept of grinding roast coffee beans and making a hot water infusion from them… :)

Everyone Knows Starbucks Designed the first ever coffee grinding machine and all other companies are just making cheap clones!

kopite
Everyone Knows Starbucks Designed the first ever coffee grinding machine and all other companies are just making cheap clones!

They also invented coffee too. Coffee did not exist before, just highly caffeinated beverages which were cheap rubbish with no luxury feel to the palate.

uni
not needing connecting to itunes is a BIG advantage? really? i think you are vastly over exaggerating there. if you really don't have a pc of any kind and can't get access to one i'm sure the store you buy it from will activate it for you, being a £400+ sale. when i had to return my iphone4 the day after launch they gave me a new one and activated it for me so i didn't have to wait till i got home. it just takes a few seconds to do it.

YES, not needing iTunes is a HUGE advantage - apart from it being a nasty piece of software (I've heard it referred to as “almost as crappy as Flash”) there's also the “small” matter of updates for your £400 device - you're not surely telling me that when iOS 5.0 comes out that you're going to schlepp down to Dixons/PC World/Comet/etc and ask them to do the update?! :wallbash:
If so, then I'd claim that this is lame, lame, lame and, coincidentally, maintain that (seeing as you've not said to the contrary) that a serious iOS device user needs a computer to run iTunes!

uni
on a similar note, whilst it's not been mentioned here so much, i've heard people bang on about the locked down nature of iphone and ipad, but jailbreaking gets you out of that. whilst the same people who love android are faced with all sorts of measures to update and get things working, depending on make and model. nearly every day i read about another hack to get one “old” (old being just a few months old) device to update to the latest android, or so you can update before your manufacturer gets round to fixing it for your device. you either do that or you can be stuck with an old version of the software.

Hmm, there's a couple of things going on here that you've managed to mix up - allow me to explain…

Firstly, yes, some manufacturers managed to miss out on their commitment to updates (yes, I'm looking at you specifically SonyEricsson!). So yes, my year old SE X10 had to be rooted and then Cyanogen'd - took me about 45 minutes including reading the instructions and downloading the various files needed. Since then I've been through three different OS revisions and they've been pretty trivial processes (to be honest I've spent more time arranging my desktops the way I want because I can't be bothered to look up which file has to be recovered). And note, I am not, nor do I claim to be, any kind of l33t developer type - when it comes to phones, I'm just a user. Manufacturers have been duly castigated, and are all claiming to have learned their lesson - so hopefully we'll see a proper support process (a la Apple - yes, I know) from now on. PS The official way to do major updates (OS 1.6->2.1 for example) on the X10 is to use a piece of software called the Sony Ericsson Update Service (SEUS) which - like iTunes - runs on a Windows/Mac PC, and it's about as difficult to apply as SEUS update and an iTunes one. Minor updates are delivered as “UOTA” - Update-Over-The-Air - no PC needed.

Secondly, this process is NOT NEEDED for the newer gear like the tablets - they get ALL their updates as UOTA. The last one I did (OS 3.1->3.2) was really difficult (sarcasm) - the Transformer popped up a little box saying that there was an update available, would I like to apply it now or wait. I said to apply now, and less than 10 minutes later the deed was done and I was back in operation with a newly updated system - simple! (and again, no PC needed)

Maybe at some point Apple will decide to steal this feature and iTunes will cease to be a requirement. Heck, they might even start to officially allow other media software to drive their products (note I can use what the heck I like - Window Media Player, Windows Explorer, RhythmBox on Linux, etc - to put content onto my Android devices). ;) Actually I just transferred a couple of episodes of Torchwood (so I can see them later - missed them when they were on the TV) to my Transformer - and there I used a file transfer client on the Transformer (files were on my Linux media server, so it was an SCP transfer).

Summary: I think we'd better just agree to disagree - you're always going to be praising at the Church of Jobs and wanting to lynch the ‘droid heretics. Meanwhile, I’m going to be hacked off with Apple's strongarm tactics and unjustified snobbery. (It's only a flippin' piece of tech for lord's sake - not some kind of divine bequest!)

Apparently there's a new iOS version coming out soon which does away with the iTunes dependence.

Although Apple will probably patent desktop application independence as well.

YES, not needing iTunes is a HUGE advantage - apart from it being a nasty piece of software (I've heard it referred to as “almost as crappy as Flash”) there's also the “small” matter of updates for your £400 device - you're not surely telling me that when iOS 5.0 comes out that you're going to schlepp down to Dixons/PC World/Comet/etc and ask them to do the update?!
If so, then I'd claim that this is lame, lame, lame and, coincidentally, maintain that (seeing as you've not said to the contrary) that a serious iOS device user needs a computer to run iTunes!

I would have thought that anyone buying an iPhone would likely already have a PC to use it with, or already have iTunes installed and/or purchased music, so I fail to see how not needing iTunes is a huge advantage. It might be a bit slow and clunky at times (note to Apple, please streamline this), but plugging in your iPhone to copy over your music collection is no more/less inconvenient than plugging in your Android device to do exactly the same thing. I'd argue that the iPhone approach is actually simpler because it does this all automatically whereas the Android device would require you to hunt down your music collection and copy the folders across manually.

Android doesn't need plugged in. And other media players can do the whole device management thing in, you're just not restricted to one media player, or any at all. You can even download media from the internet using the android device itself. You have a choice of what you want to do.

crossy
YES, not needing iTunes is a HUGE advantage - apart from it being a nasty piece of software (I've heard it referred to as “almost as crappy as Flash”) there's also the “small” matter of updates for your £400 device - you're not surely telling me that when iOS 5.0 comes out that you're going to schlepp down to Dixons/PC World/Comet/etc and ask them to do the update?! :wallbash:
If so, then I'd claim that this is lame, lame, lame and, coincidentally, maintain that (seeing as you've not said to the contrary) that a serious iOS device user needs a computer to run iTunes!

Hmm, there's a couple of things going on here that you've managed to mix up - allow me to explain…

Firstly, yes, some manufacturers managed to miss out on their commitment to updates (yes, I'm looking at you specifically SonyEricsson!). So yes, my year old SE X10 had to be rooted and then Cyanogen'd - took me about 45 minutes including reading the instructions and downloading the various files needed. Since then I've been through three different OS revisions and they've been pretty trivial processes (to be honest I've spent more time arranging my desktops the way I want because I can't be bothered to look up which file has to be recovered). And note, I am not, nor do I claim to be, any kind of l33t developer type - when it comes to phones, I'm just a user. Manufacturers have been duly castigated, and are all claiming to have learned their lesson - so hopefully we'll see a proper support process (a la Apple - yes, I know) from now on. PS The official way to do major updates (OS 1.6->2.1 for example) on the X10 is to use a piece of software called the Sony Ericsson Update Service (SEUS) which - like iTunes - runs on a Windows/Mac PC, and it's about as difficult to apply as SEUS update and an iTunes one. Minor updates are delivered as “UOTA” - Update-Over-The-Air - no PC needed.

Secondly, this process is NOT NEEDED for the newer gear like the tablets - they get ALL their updates as UOTA. The last one I did (OS 3.1->3.2) was really difficult (sarcasm) - the Transformer popped up a little box saying that there was an update available, would I like to apply it now or wait. I said to apply now, and less than 10 minutes later the deed was done and I was back in operation with a newly updated system - simple! (and again, no PC needed)

Maybe at some point Apple will decide to steal this feature and iTunes will cease to be a requirement. Heck, they might even start to officially allow other media software to drive their products (note I can use what the heck I like - Window Media Player, Windows Explorer, RhythmBox on Linux, etc - to put content onto my Android devices). ;) Actually I just transferred a couple of episodes of Torchwood (so I can see them later - missed them when they were on the TV) to my Transformer - and there I used a file transfer client on the Transformer (files were on my Linux media server, so it was an SCP transfer).

Summary: I think we'd better just agree to disagree - you're always going to be praising at the Church of Jobs and wanting to lynch the ‘droid heretics. Meanwhile, I’m going to be hacked off with Apple's strongarm tactics and unjustified snobbery. (It's only a flippin' piece of tech for lord's sake - not some kind of divine bequest!)

as others have already pointed out, few people would have an iphone/ipad and not a pc/mac to be able to update. and from what i understand, from ios5 onwards you will be able to updated OTA as well as synch wirelessly with itunes. and i believe there's an apple conference thing on 7th september which will probably coincide with the release of ios, so in less than a month those issues will be gone, but i doubt the issues with android updates will be gone by the end of the year

and for the record i'm no fanboy of anything. i can perhaps understand people loving a device or product and raving on about it, or understand that some people feel the need to reassure their insecurities by bumping up products they own and downplaying those they don't own, although i can't quite understand why, but i can't really understand why people would hate on products or companies. perhaps if the companies tested on animals and destroyed the environment and they were the environmentally crustie types, but as far as i'm concerned, both the fanboys and haters are just as bad as each other, perhaps the haters moreso as there's no real reason for it, it's just all hatred which can't be good, whilst at least the fanboys enjoy what they have. i mean i don't even sit on the fence, i'm miles away standing back watching whats going on and all i see is people jumping on a company they aren't connected to and standing up for other companies they aren't connected to. multi million or even billion making worldwide corporations. taking the side of one company or another is just as bad. so if you side with or disagree with one company over another, there's something not quite right there. take yourself as an example, you are quite clear in your hatred of another companies products. that surely can't be healthy. likewise the people who put sigs and images in their post against companies. there has to be something up with an individual who does something like that. there is a style of humour based on repetitiveness but repeating the same thing verbatim in that way is not humour, it's just tiring and stale. and trying to label anyone who don't agree with as a fanboy or similar or the opposite is just ridiculous

if people take a step back and look at the situation as it stands without having any bias, which is understandably hard to do, most people have likes and dislikes, so prejudices and biases so can't look at things completely impartially, i've had to do it as part of my jobs since an early age so i'm used to it, so i can view the situation without any bias for or against either company, and i would have expected mature members of a tech site to be able to do the same. regardless of if you like or dislike apple or samsung, surely no right minded person could fail to see that samsung have clearly copied the ipad and priced it in the same market. if samsung sold the item at the £200 or less price point to make a decent tablet that was more accessible to the people then i could imagine more people being sympathetic to the case, but not when they are competiting directly for the same market by copying the competitor and market leaders products such as galaxy tabe the the s2 or whatever the samsung iphone is called

or maybe i'm wrong and the members of this site aren't as mature and adult as i expected them to be. making i'm mistakenly conversing with a bunch of teenagers and wasting my time?

Can i just say, itunes is poop…. know a few people whose iphones had been wiped due to its stupid way of dealing with applications or something, my mate lost all his songs lol!.

Also know a good few iphones to crash, same as android phones and same with ipad vs other tablets… swings and round abouts and the fact apple were…. almost last to the tablet market is a key factor for my view as to why this is a stupid notion and hope Samsung wins and gets a crap load off Apple and destroys them for being average on the tech front and hindering advancements!

aidanjt
Android doesn't need plugged in. And other media players can do the whole device management thing in, you're just not restricted to one media player, or any at all. You can even download media from the internet using the android device itself. You have a choice of what you want to do.

So how do you transfer your music/video/podcast collection?

mrochester
So how do you transfer your music/video/podcast collection?

Well there is the amazon mp3 app so you can download music directly from there for one source.

mrochester
So how do you transfer your music/video/podcast collection?

SMB, MTP, HTTP, FTP, SCP, Torrent, Usenet, Mass storage transfer over USB, via SD cards, etc., etc… A shorter list might be how many ways can you not transfer your music/video/podcast collection.

mrochester
I would have thought that anyone buying an iPhone would likely already have a PC to use it with, or already have iTunes installed and/or purchased music, so I fail to see how not needing iTunes is a huge advantage. It might be a bit slow and clunky at times (note to Apple, please streamline this), but plugging in your iPhone to copy over your music collection is no more/less inconvenient than plugging in your Android device to do exactly the same thing. I'd argue that the iPhone approach is actually simpler because it does this all automatically whereas the Android device would require you to hunt down your music collection and copy the folders across manually.

I must be one of those incredibly rare people who didn't and still don't have iTunes installed despite having owned an iPod Touch for several years. It leaves parts of itself running in the background (that I'm aware of, and can therefore disable) - what else does it do to slow down my computer that I don't know about?
To update with music/firmware, I have iTunes installed on a dedicated virtual machine. Not exactly what I expect many people to do, but it is a big disadvantage for me that it requires iTunes.

aidanjt
SMB, MTP, HTTP, FTP, SCP, Torrent, Usenet, Mass storage transfer over USB, via SD cards, etc., etc… A shorter list might be how many ways can you not transfer your music/video/podcast collection.

I still don't understand why you'd need all of those different methods to get your content from your PC to phone. Surely the way you'd do it on an Android phone is exactly the same way you'd do it on an iPhone (i.e., you'd connect the device or memory card to the PC)?

mrochester
I still don't understand why you'd need all of those different methods to get your content from your PC to phone. Surely the way you'd do it on an Android phone is exactly the same way you'd do it on an iPhone (i.e., you'd connect the device or memory card to the PC)?

The whole point of aidanjt`s extensive list is that there are loads of ways to put music on your android phone. many that dont require the user to have a computer.

If you have a computer then its very easy to drag and drop songs accross to your phone. Its much simpler than itunes.

There`s also google music which is up and running in the us atm Which is a Cloud based music system so again no need to access a pc for your music.

If you really must have an itunes style program there is doubletwist which allows you to sync your music and is even better than itunes as it can be done wirelessly as well.

Itunes is an awful program on windows Up there with AOL and Norton in the most hated software out there. i`d even go as far as to say its worse than realplayer was back in the day

kopite
The whole point of aidanjt`s extensive list is that there are loads of ways to put music on your android phone. many that dont require the user to have a computer.

If you have a computer then its very easy to drag and drop songs accross to your phone. Its much simpler than itunes.

There`s also google music which is up and running in the us atm Which is a Cloud based music system so again no need to access a pc for your music.

If you really must have an itunes style program there is doubletwist which allows you to sync your music and is even better than itunes as it can be done wirelessly as well.

Itunes is an awful program on windows Up there with AOL and Norton in the most hated software out there. i`d even go as far as to say its worse than realplayer was back in the day

Manually dragging and dropping your music is simpler than iTunes automatically syncing the same content? I think you've got an uphill battle to convince people that manually dragging and dropping your music is easier than an automatic sync ;).

Well Yeah.

Android version of copying music.

1. Drag music you want to your phone.
2. Done

Iphone version

1. Create Playlist of music you want to copy on to your iphone.
2. Click sync
3.done

That looks like an extra step to me? Or am I missing something?

iTunes is the whole reason I refuse to own an apple product.

mrochester
I still don't understand why you'd need all of those different methods to get your content from your PC to phone. Surely the way you'd do it on an Android phone is exactly the same way you'd do it on an iPhone (i.e., you'd connect the device or memory card to the PC)?

The point is you get to choose the method which is most suitable for how you work. The device adapts to you, rather than you having to adapt to the device. And no, the source doesn't have to be your PC, the source can be virtually anything.

kopite
Well Yeah.

Android version of copying music.

1. Drag music you want to your phone.
2. Done

Iphone version

1. Create Playlist of music you want to copy on to your iphone.
2. Click sync
3.done

That looks like an extra step to me? Or am I missing something?

Yeah you're missing quite a few steps :P

Android:

Plug device into PC, and mount memory card if not selected by default. Browse to content on PC. Copy content. Browse to SD card and past content.

iPhone:

Connect iPhone to PC.

Quite a lot simpler with the iPhone.

mrochester
Yeah you're missing quite a few steps :P

Android:

Plug device into PC, and mount memory card if not selected by default. Browse to content on PC. Copy content. Browse to SD card and past content.

iPhone:

Connect iPhone to PC.

Quite a lot simpler with the iPhone.

Oh come on now, that's horribly disingenuous. Optional MTP support provides an ‘itunes-like’ device syncing process if that's what you want. You're not being forced to transfer via SD if you don't want to.

mrochester
Yeah you're missing quite a few steps :P

Android:

Plug device into PC, and mount memory card if not selected by default. Browse to content on PC. Copy content. Browse to SD card and past content.

iPhone:

Connect iPhone to PC.

Quite a lot simpler with the iPhone.

Ok I give you I missed out the plug device in step but I assumed both where already plugged in and ready.

There is a thing on Windows called windows explorer. It has this amazing feature whereby you Can drag files from a folder on to a drive listed on the left. Its an amazing feature thats only been around for over 10 years..

Here`s an updated list then

android:

1. plug in phone(lest assume its set to automount)
2. Open up your music folder
3. drag music from the music folder to the drive listed on the left hand side.
4. done

Iphone:
1. Plug in Iphone
2. Load up itunes
3. create playlist
4. Sync playlist
5. done

Still one step less. And thats not taking into account the extra programs that are loaded by Itunes in the background.

The main point is with Android its a much simpler process without using any resource hungry programs. But as aidanjt you are not forced to do it this way there are a multitude of different ways to copy music accross. IF you want the Itunes style Process then you can use double twist as I`ve mentioned before and that even negates the need to be connected to the pc as it can sync over the wifi

kopite
Ok I give you I missed out the plug device in step but I assumed both where already plugged in and ready.

There is a thing on Windows called windows explorer. It has this amazing feature whereby you Can drag files from a folder on to a drive listed on the left. Its an amazing feature thats only been around for over 10 years..

Here`s an updated list then

android:

1. plug in phone(lest assume its set to automount)
2. Open up your music folder
3. drag music from the music folder to the drive listed on the left hand side.
4. done

Iphone:
1. Plug in Iphone
2. Load up itunes
3. create playlist
4. Sync playlist
5. done

Still one step less. And thats not taking into account the extra programs that are loaded by Itunes in the background.

The main point is with Android its a much simpler process without using any resource hungry programs. But as aidanjt you are not forced to do it this way there are a multitude of different ways to copy music accross. IF you want the Itunes style Process then you can use double twist as I`ve mentioned before and that even negates the need to be connected to the pc as it can sync over the wifi

Step 2, 3 and 4 aren't required for the iPhone so it's only one step. I'm afraid you're not going to be able to convince me that manually managing and copying my music collection is simpler than having it synced automatically. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

So the Iphone doesnt even need itunes now then?

How does iTunes know what music you want on your iThing?

miniyazz
I must be one of those incredibly rare people who didn't and still don't have iTunes installed despite having owned an iPod Touch for several years. It leaves parts of itself running in the background (that I'm aware of, and can therefore disable) - what else does it do to slow down my computer that I don't know about?
To update with music/firmware, I have iTunes installed on a dedicated virtual machine. Not exactly what I expect many people to do, but it is a big disadvantage for me that it requires iTunes.

I am part if that rare breed too, I use Amarok on a Linux box to transfer mpr tracks to my Ipod mini. There are other open source programs (or apps to use the current buzzword) to trnsfer content to later devices.

Itunes though does seem to work better on the OS it was designed for than it does on windows.

kopite
So the Iphone doesnt even need itunes now then?

It starts automatically so no manual intervention required ;).

How does iTunes know what music you want on your iThing?
Today 10:17 AM

It'll sync everything unless you select otherwise :).

What if your music collection is bigger than your iThing memory?

kopite
So the Iphone doesnt even need itunes now then?

to activate it you do. although there are various means to hacktivate it, or at least they were. i did that with my first iphone. and there are programs like mediamonkey that are itunes replacements, but even though itunes is horrible it's usually just easier just to use that, especially on the iphone

the thing is, there are plenty of people who aren't used to using windows explorer or finder and drag and drop and do need something like itunes. although in saying that it's usually people i know who use macs instead of pc's that have less of a clue about these things and need itunes or they wouldn't be able to get music on the iphone or ipod

it is an extra step to use itunes but it's not exactly a major issue. once you've got used to itunes it's not so bad really. i'd obviously prefer not to have to use it and use drag and drop and folders like my archos mp3 player

I heard iTunes is as crap as Flash. It should be removed from Apple's hardware to be honest.

You can auto sync with android too (wirelessly) - but then that's just the point, there's lots of choice versus the walled garden approach and as some people have pointed out - iTunes is a piece of crap. Apple should not be allowed to make Windows software - not only is it the ultimate bloatware it has a long history of confusing the hell out of users by doing ‘fun’ stuff like magically removing all their music etc. It's neither simple or elegant - the polar opposite of what Apple do for the most part. Still, it's amusing to see someone defending it - really you have to be extremely blinkered not to admit it's bloomin horrible.

dangel
You can auto sync with android too (wirelessly) - but then that's just the point, there's lots of choice versus the walled garden approach and as some people have pointed out - iTunes is a piece of crap. Apple should not be allowed to make Windows software - not only is it the ultimate bloatware it has a long history of confusing the hell out of users by doing ‘fun’ stuff like magically removing all their music etc. It's neither simple or elegant - the polar opposite of what Apple do for the most part. Still, it's amusing to see someone defending it - really you have to be extremely blinkered not to admit it's bloomin horrible.

I think being realistic is more appropriate. iTunes is slow and buggy at times, but it also makes regular backups of my iDevices and keeps them all in sync with one another. The convenience offered outweighs any negatives IMO.

uni
the dell streak? at least the 5" model has been dropped. i'm not sure about the rest. it's the same problem as the galaxy tab and xoom though, it's too expensive and doesn't do anything notable that the ipad doesn't, so again the question as to why spend that money for a clone or copy instead of the real thing

:shocked2:For the love of God Uni (I'm now religious) - please tell me why it is you think the iPad is the only true tablet.

cameronlite
:shocked2:For the love of God Uni (I'm now religious) - please tell me why it is you think the iPad is the only true tablet.

i don't

mrochester
I think being realistic is more appropriate. iTunes is slow and buggy at times, but it also makes regular backups of my iDevices and keeps them all in sync with one another. The convenience offered outweighs any negatives IMO.

In what way was my post unrealistic? It's based on my experience and the experience of others. If you disagree then feel free to put up a reasonable argument to why I'm wrong rather than being dismissive. Realistically people put up with all sorts of crap because they have no choice or know no better - that doesn't magically excuse the dire mess that iTunes is on Windows. Ignorance is bliss? Maybe not.

dangel
In what way was my post unrealistic? It's based on my experience and the experience of others. If you disagree then feel free to put up a reasonable argument to why I'm wrong rather than being dismissive. Realistically people put up with all sorts of crap because they have no choice or know no better - that doesn't magically excuse the dire mess that iTunes is on Windows. Ignorance is bliss? Maybe not.

I don't find iTunes a ‘dire mess’. It can be a little slow and buggy at times, but it performs a Stirling job of keeping my devices in sync and backed up.

mrochester
I don't find iTunes a ‘dire mess’. It can be a little slow and buggy at times, but it performs a Stirling job of keeping my devices in sync and backed up.

Sounds like Flash :laugh:

usxhe190
Sounds like Flash :laugh:

Flash is just an order of magnitude worse :P.

mrochester
I don't find iTunes a ‘dire mess’. It can be a little slow and buggy at times, but it performs a Stirling job of keeping my devices in sync and backed up.

Well then, that's irrefutable. :rolleyes:

:woowoo:

uni
i don't

You just said that every other tablet was inferior to the iPad because the iPad is the ‘real thing’.

How is the iPad the real thing again?

Have the last 4 pages not provided any evidence to suggest that the iPad wasn't the first tablet out and therefore can't be the real thing (regarding everything else as cheap copies).

dangel
Well then, that's irrefutable. :rolleyes:

:woowoo:

If you want to talk about a ‘dire mess’, you need look no further than Samsung Kies :p

How is the iPad the real thing again?

I suppose you could say it's the original modern day tablet. It's not the original tablet ever, but it's the original what we now expect a tablet to be. And in that sense, it's the ‘real thing’, the genuine product.

mrochester
If you want to talk about a ‘dire mess’, you need look no further than Samsung Kies :p

No idea what one is, have no experience. Does it have some bearing on iTunes?

dangel
No idea what one is, have no experience. Does it have some bearing on iTunes?

It's Samsung's dreadful take on an iTunes like client, but much much more :yucky:

mrochester
It's Samsung's dreadful take on an iTunes like client, but much much more :yucky:

Then it must be terrible given that baseline. What did you find so bad about it exactly out of interest?

I take it that you're only defence of iTunes is based on your own experience (which you admit is “slow and buggy”) - see previous post.

dangel
Then it must be terrible given that baseline. What did you find so bad about it exactly out of interest?

I take it that you're only defence of iTunes is based on your own experience (which you admit is “slow and buggy”) - see previous post.

Well of course it's my own experience. Who elses experience is it going to be?

Kies is incredibly slow, all of the time. It also doesn't always detect the connected phone, and is frequently unresponsive.

Zune is definitely the fastest, most responsive and least buggy sync client I've found.

This is very interesting:

http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/15/apples-evidence-in-european-galaxy-tab-injunction-was-seriously-misleading-as-in-false/

I HATE Samsung Kies - it's soooooo slow and I'm running a sodding Force 3 SSD.

Fortunately with all the other ways to sync to my Android I'm not forced to use the crappy itunes. Oh sorry, I meant Kies :p

CAT-THE-FIFTH
This is very interesting:

http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/15/apples-evidence-in-european-galaxy-tab-injunction-was-seriously-misleading-as-in-false/

Why am I not surprised? Also, shame on the German legal system for prosecuting without representation.

cameronlite
I HATE Samsung Kies - it's soooooo slow and I'm running a sodding Force 3 SSD.

Fortunately with all the other ways to sync to my Android I'm not forced to use the crappy itunes. Oh sorry, I meant Kies :p

And it's a good job iTunes isn't anywhere near as crappy as Kies, so it doesn't really matter whether you have to use it :)

For the sake of fairness I have just tried DoubleTwist and it managed to be slower than iTunes because a process called ‘Transcode.server.exe’ was consuming 100% of one core. It also appears to lack the ability to alter the folders it watches for content (other than allowing you to add them; you then can't remove them) which seems like a bizarre ommission for a media syncing programme. Otherwise, the interface is very clear with a nice minimalist style. The Android Market section was a bit bust with a number of “500 internal server errors” when clicking through to see the details of an app. I don't see anything drastically different to iTunes.

cameronlite
You just said that every other tablet was inferior to the iPad because the iPad is the ‘real thing’.

How is the iPad the real thing again?

Have the last 4 pages not provided any evidence to suggest that the iPad wasn't the first tablet out and therefore can't be the real thing (regarding everything else as cheap copies).

it doesn't sound like you've read anything i've posted. i didn't say anything like that at all

i've made it very clear ipad wasn't the first tablet and apple doesn't appear to have been the first to make anything they've done

CAT-THE-FIFTH
This is very interesting:

http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/15/apples-evidence-in-european-galaxy-tab-injunction-was-seriously-misleading-as-in-false/

if that's the case then shouldn't the case be thrown straight out and apple be done for falsifying evidence?

I was messing with a Galaxy tab the other night in the trafford centre and its a nice looking piece of kit I just cant see how I`d get use out of any tablet really

mrochester
And it's a good job iTunes isn't anywhere near as crappy as Kies, so it doesn't really matter whether you have to use it :)

For the sake of fairness I have just tried DoubleTwist and it managed to be slower than iTunes because a process called ‘Transcode.server.exe’ was consuming 100% of one core.

Sounds like it was Transcoding something - ie converting from one format to another on the fly - what were you attempting to do with it ?

aidanjt
Why am I not surprised? Also, shame on the German legal system for prosecuting without representation.

The reason Apple went for a court in Germany is because it's very easy to get this sort of thing by - the fact they did so with what can only be described as ‘tampering’ stinks. It'll be interesting to see this one play out in light of this.

mrochester
Well of course it's my own experience.

Your tolerance for bad software is a lot higher than mine obviously - me I'd replace “buggy and slow” in a heartbeat.

Moby-Dick
Sounds like it was Transcoding something - ie converting from one format to another on the fly - what were you attempting to do with it ?

I wasn't doing anything, I simply started up the program.

Your tolerance for bad software is a lot higher than mine obviously - me I'd replace “buggy and slow” in a heartbeat.

I think if I had such little tolerance I would end up not using a computer as I haven't found any bit of software that works perfectly all of the time!

It could have been doing a background conversion , or it could have been just a bug ;)

mrochester
I think if I had such little tolerance I would end up not using a computer as I haven't found any bit of software that works perfectly all of the time!

meh, point missed but neer mind..

Moby-Dick
It could have been doing a background conversion , or it could have been just a bug ;)

More than likely the former, I've got it installed but had no problems. Upon install (and first time start) it will scan for (and process) music on your PC - seeing as he (presumably) had iTunes installed and therefore a large library some processing would be expected. By default it will scan the iTunes library and the WMP library for new files on start - both of which can be disabled in the preferences. First start will always be cpu intensive therefore and tail off thereafter.

meh, point missed but neer mind..

Was your point not that if you came across that had any slow down or bugs you'd change it in a heartbeat? And my counter point was that if I had such low tolerance levels I wouldn't have any software because I haven't come across any software that's bug or error free.

More than likely the former, I've got it installed but had no problems. Upon install (and first time start) it will scan for (and process) music on your PC - seeing as he (presumably) had iTunes installed and therefore a large library some processing would be expected. By default it will scan the iTunes library and the WMP library for new files on start - both of which can be disabled in the preferences. First start will always be cpu intensive therefore and tail off thereafter.

It had already added all the content to the library. It was still churning away after about 20mins of being up and running so I just removed it again as a bad job.

mrochester
I would have thought that anyone buying an iPhone would likely already have a PC to use it with, or already have iTunes installed and/or purchased music, so I fail to see how not needing iTunes is a huge advantage. It might be a bit slow and clunky at times (note to Apple, please streamline this), but plugging in your iPhone to copy over your music collection is no more/less inconvenient than plugging in your Android device to do exactly the same thing. I'd argue that the iPhone approach is actually simpler because it does this all automatically whereas the Android device would require you to hunt down your music collection and copy the folders across manually.

Erm, first of we're supposed to be talking about tablets, not phones. Secondly, you can just-copy-folders, or allow WMP MTP mode to do it for you - heck you can even setup playlists and sync those. Not that I've done that with my ‘droid tablet - it seems a little daft to use that for music (crappy speakers common to ALL tablets) when I’ve got a perfectly serviceable iPod 5G or Sony A-series digital Walkman.

By the way all - that was an interesting iTunes discussion! :thumbsup:

peterb
I am part if that rare breed too, I use Amarok on a Linux box to transfer mpr tracks to my Ipod mini. There are other open source programs (or apps to use the current buzzword) to trnsfer content to later devices. Itunes though does seem to work better on the OS it was designed for than it does on windows.

Amarok? Geek! :p
Actually you're right - it's pretty good. Although there's arguably (?) quite a few respectible media organisers out there for Linux. Nice to hear that iTunes is better on Mac than Windows - although not exactly unexpected.

Going off-topic - the worst iTunes competitor I found was “Mufin” from Magix. I got a free copy and it lasted about 15 minutes - it got hurriedly removed when it started to (unprompted) decided to reorganise my carefully arranged artist/album directory structure into something demented of it's own choosing. Thank the maker that I had a recent backup! Oh, and it was supposed to do something clever with catagorising your music - I never saw any evidence of that - iTunes/WMP made it look pretty darned dumb.

Kopite: like you I was pretty dismissive of the tablet - yet another fad for the sheep to queue up for. I've had mine for about a month and it's mainly used for quick internet access, video watching and game playing, although I'm also using it for some netbook type stuff - writing documents, doing spreadsheets etc. Yes, a games console or DS does games better (although the larger screen is a real plus), a proper netbook would probably do docs better (cut'n'paste in Honeycomb is just nasty with my sausage fingers) - but the tablet is able to do all of these in a single device.

I'd say that they're still waiting for the “killer app” - but if I could get an Ethernet dongle/connection for mine, then I'd have a darn good jack-of-all-trades. Tablets are thinner/lighter than netbooks, with (slightly?) longer battery lives, so they're good for server maintenance (would be “ideal” if I could get a wired connection!) - able to log in remotely and how many manuals can you carry on a 32GB uSD card? A lot!

crossy
I'd say that they're still waiting for the “killer app” - but if I could get an Ethernet dongle/connection for mine, then I'd have a darn good jack-of-all-trades. Tablets are thinner/lighter than netbooks, with (slightly?) longer battery lives, so they're good for server maintenance (would be “ideal” if I could get a wired connection!) - able to log in remotely and how many manuals can you carry on a 32GB uSD card? A lot!

remote access is what i'd like a tablet for. it's nice doing it on my iphone, but it's not as easy to use as a netbook or laptop as the screen is too small. likewise websurfing isn't so nice on a phone due to screen size. i have a netbook a couple of laptops of different sizes, but it's not so easy using a netbook or laptop on the bus on on the move. on the train is fine, i'm not sure about the tube. plus in the office you can have it in an open drawer

also with more pdfs of magazines coming out you could flick through them on the bus/tube. i think magazines are better suited to ereaders than books as they are more disposible in the flick through nature, and many people like myself find it hard to concentrate properly during travel enough to read a book, but can listen to music and flick through papers or websites or magazines that aren't so attention grabbing

mrochester
Was your point ..

:rolleyes:

mrochester
It had already added all the content to the library. It was still churning away after about 20mins of being up and running so I just removed it again as a bad job.

I guess we'll never know, I just posted my observations I can't tell what your particular config was up to and I don't use iTunes.

CAT-THE-FIFTH
This is very interesting:

http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/15/apples-evidence-in-european-galaxy-tab-injunction-was-seriously-misleading-as-in-false/

Has other places reported on this? This might be a turning point if it is true.

Good to know that the Reality Distortion Field is working fine though.

I'd like to believe it was just a formatting mistake - heck of an oversight though given the subject matter. I don't think this changes anything for Samsung - can they even see the judge before November now?

It looks like the ban has been lifted in most countries:

http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/16/german-court-lifts-ban-on-some-european-samsung-galaxy-10-1-sale/

“Sales of the device were originally banned following an Apple lawsuit alleging patent infringement, but were permitted to resume after a realization that a German court may not have the authority to halt sales of a South Korean company's device outside of Germany. ”

uni
remote access is what i'd like a tablet for. it's nice doing it on my iphone, but it's not as easy to use as a netbook or laptop as the screen is too small. likewise websurfing isn't so nice on a phone due to screen size. i have a netbook a couple of laptops of different sizes, but it's not so easy using a netbook or laptop on the bus on on the move. on the train is fine, i'm not sure about the tube. plus in the office you can have it in an open drawer

:thumbsup: yes, I find the tablet's better screen-size/weight ratio means that it's nicer than a netbook. The downside (for Android at least) is that all the terminal apps seem to assume that you're on a phone, so it's one session at a time - boo! Although this is bound to change as tablets become more popular.
Maybe a killer accessory would be some form of charging dock that could have USB keyboards attached, (it might already be available - I'm sure Motorola have something similar), so you type/mouse away and then undock and go on the shop floor - using the tablet as tablet. Modern tablets are easily powerful enough to do Office-style work locally, and I'm sure adding “cloud” into that mix would greatly extend the range of possible activities.

uni
also with more pdfs of magazines coming out you could flick through them on the bus/tube. i think magazines are better suited to ereaders than books as they are more disposible in the flick through nature, and many people like myself find it hard to concentrate properly during travel enough to read a book, but can listen to music and flick through papers or websites or magazines that aren't so attention grabbing

Yes, there's a couple of mags out there (Zinio hosted?) but the majority I've seen are just digital versions of the print mags - no real interactivity. It struck me that Virgin Media's mag - “Electric” - which is currently browser delivered, would be ideal for viewing on a pad, it's got a lot of special effects and hotspots that would be great for a ‘pad. Certainly I really like the ePub reader on my tablet - I’m doing a Perl refresher at the moment and it's nicer to read the ORA books on the tablet than the PDF versions on my laptop.

It looks like Samsung IS mentioning the tablet from 2001:

http://gizmodo.com/5833586/samsung-cites-2001-a-space-odyssey-against-apple-in-greatest-legal-defense-of-all-time

I wonder if Samsung has been looking at forums like Hexus:

http://forums.hexus.net/2110601-post80.html

:p

What i dont like is how the latest iOS has stolen the notification pull down that Android use..

I bet the judge probably uses Apple.. too many cult fanboys that cant be convinced otherwise.

Now that jobs has stepped down i can only hope the entire company follows suit, think it would be a far better world if wherever i looked i wouldnt see someone screaming and shouting about how cool there iphone 4 is..

Anyway. What striked me most about the 10.1 is how thin it is, i havent seen a tablet quite like it. And it felt a very good weight in my hand. Just a shame i cant afford the applesque price tag, and that i missed out on a Touchpad :(

CrazyMonkey
What i dont like is how the latest iOS has stolen the notification pull down that Android use..

Didnt you know? Apple invented the Notification pull down a week last thursday. Google is just copying it.

In my opinion the current state of sueing everyone over patent infringment is going to hurt innovation.

The Design Thing that apple was granted in the first place is a total joke. I know the car analogy has been used but look at other devices. Imagine if someone had said that anyone who makes a tv thats of a certain ratio (4/3 16/9) Is copying and should be banned we`d be in a complete mess as Broadcasts would look different on any device.

The reason The samsung galaxy tab and other tabs look so similar to the ipad is that the ipad is the optimal size/ratio for its use. As has been pointed out numerous times there where devices before the ipad using the design.

kopite
The reason The samsung galaxy tab and other tabs look so similar to the ipad is that the ipad is the optimal size/ratio for its use.

Actually, the iPad isn't. It's 4:3 (remember those adverts on TV playing films on it? Yes, they cut off the edges of the frame to make it fit without black bars), and the galaxy tab uses a more useful 16:9 ratio (or something closer to it anyway, I can't remember the specifics). Which makes Apple's case even more ridiculous.

This tablet was released in 2008:

http://www.tabletpcreview.com/default.asp?newsID=1130

CAT-THE-FIFTH
This tablet was released in 2008:

http://www.tabletpcreview.com/default.asp?newsID=1130

Blatant rip off of the Ipad.

Do these companies have nothing better to do than rip off apples awesome designs and then travel back in time to release them. makes me so mad !! :censored: :p