Apple v Samsung Patent verdict is out

whiterebel

Big win for Apple v Samsung on the iPhone, but not iPad. They won most of it, and are awarded over $1Bn damages.
Macrumors

sullzz

whiterebel wrote: »

Big win for Apple v Samsung on the iPhone, but not iPad. They won most of it, and are awarded over $1Bn damages.
Macrumors

Big blow for samsung , and google

blankblank

And a big loss for consumers me thinks ,,,,,,,,,,

andy1249

The full Verdict and Details are here ,

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120824175815101

There are a huge number of inconsistencies , along with the fact that the Judge refused Samsung permission to present evidence showing prior art belonging to Sony ,

Because of that , this stands a very likelihood of being overturned , and the legal press in the US are calling it a "Farce" and a "Preposterous Result" and that this is almost certain to happen.

Zascar

A Massive loss for consumers. Taking what makes sense and developing further upon it is now illegal? Nice work apple.

Gumbo

Zascar wrote: »

A Massive loss for consumers. Taking what makes sense and developing further upon it is now illegal? Nice work apple.

Could also be worded :

A Massive loss for consumers. Taking what makes sense and developing further upon it is now illegal? Nice work Samsung.

Their both as bad as each other in my opinion. They should just join hands and release an Apple Galaxy S4GS or something.

McGrath5

As much as I like Apple products, this statement from Samsung does highlight what a bad day for consumers this is,

Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer.

ZETOR_IS_BETTER

From the beginning, legal experts and Wall Street analysts viewed Samsung as the underdog in the case. Apple's headquarters is a mere 10 miles from the courthouse, and jurors were picked from the heart of Silicon Valley where Apple's late founder Steve Jobs is a revered technological pioneer.

Poor sammy didnt have a chance :pac:

Link

Johnmb

Perfect Choice wrote: »

As much as I like Apple products, this statement from Samsung does highlight what a bad day for consumers this is,

Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer.

I'd actually have thought it would lead to more choice. It's always been pretty clear that Samsung just copied the iPhone (it was just a matter of whether or not Apple could claim ownership of the designs). Now Samsung will have to go and innovate something different. With their money and resources, they should be able to come up with something new and unique, something Apple hasn't already come up with. Then, instead of just having the current choice of an iPhone or a cheaper knock-off, you'd have a choice of an iPhone or a unique Samsung phone that looks and feels completely different. Of course, if Samsung can't innovate something new they are in trouble, but that could be a life line to Nokia.

jonnny68

Apple are the most pathetic company ive ever come across, they know full well Samsung and especially Android are light years ahead of them in every respect so they go to extreme lengths and probably pay off judges to sue them, stick your walled garden where the sun don't shine.

jenno86

jonnny68 wrote: »

Apple are the most pathetic company ive ever come across, they know full well Samsung and especially Android are light years ahead of them in every respect so they go to extreme lengths and probably pay off judges to sue them, stick your walled garden where the sun don't shine.

Maybe Samsung shouldn't have infringed their patents.

Tazium

I find it odd that they can maintain their part supply trade business while all this is happening. Does this mean that Microsoft can now sue Apple for their iPad designs against Microsofts Tablet PC design? Where does it all end?

FWIW, Moses was the first dude with tablets.

blankblank

It will most likely lead to less competition in the market.

Companies will all be running scared in case there new phone resembles the iphone in some way.

Ive had an iphone for years and recently switched to a galaxy. I dont think either are better than the other, different strokes for different folks and all that. I just find it ridiculous that apple can claim they own the image of a phone with rounded corners. Complete bull!

And this whole argument of individuals will confuse apple products with samsung products? Rubbish. If a person is not competent enough to realise they are buying an apple product or a samsung product they shouldn't have such a high end phone.

A victory for apple yes, but shame on them.

JTMan

It is a sad reflection on Apple, that they choose to use bullying tactics to pursue flimsical patent claims.

Apple 1 Innovation 0.

The Mad Hatter

Davie89 wrote: »

It will most likely lead to less competition in the market.

Companies will all be running scared in case there new phone resembles the iphone in some way.

Ive had an iphone for years and recently switched to a galaxy. I dont think either are better than the other, different strokes for different folks and all that. I just find it ridiculous that apple can claim they own the image of a phone with rounded corners. Complete bull!

And this whole argument of individuals will confuse apple products with samsung products? Rubbish. If a person is not competent enough to realise they are buying an apple product or a samsung product they shouldn't have such a high end phone.

A victory for apple yes, but shame on them.

A lot of people are going on about the rounded corners, but that was only a small part of the suit. The larger part of Apple's claim was not simply that Samsung copied the iPhone, but that they copied it so closely that customers would have trouble distinguishing between them. To support this, Apple had logged calls from customers who owned Samsung phones which they thought were iPhones.

There was also the 126-page internal Samsung memo, comparing an early Samsung smartphone with the iPhone side by side, and showing how the Samsung phone could and should be made more like the iPhone.

There was also the memo from Google to Samsung saying, in effect, "make your phones less like the iPhone or you'll get sued."

Samsung's more recent phones have been innovative and have differentiated themselves from iPhones, but it's been built on the back of profits made on phones which did copy Apple's design and, given the enormous amount of resources put by Apple into R&D, marketing, and negotiating with carriers, I'm glad that the court has recognised that.

A Primal Nut

Johnmb wrote: »

I'd actually have thought it would lead to more choice. It's always been pretty clear that Samsung just copied the iPhone (it was just a matter of whether or not Apple could claim ownership of the designs). Now Samsung will have to go and innovate something different. With their money and resources, they should be able to come up with something new and unique, something Apple hasn't already come up with. Then, instead of just having the current choice of an iPhone or a cheaper knock-off, you'd have a choice of an iPhone or a unique Samsung phone that looks and feels completely different. Of course, if Samsung can't innovate something new they are in trouble, but that could be a life line to Nokia.

Samsung Galaxy phones are just as expensive as IPhones, if not more so. They are not cheap knock-offs. Actually many people would say they are better with more features.

Inquitus

This will be overturned on appeal, its far from over.

blankblank

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

A lot of people are going on about the rounded corners, but that was only a small part of the suit. The larger part of Apple's claim was not simply that Samsung copied the iPhone, but that they copied it so closely that customers would have trouble distinguishing between them. To support this, Apple had logged calls from customers who owned Samsung phones which they thought were iPhones.

There was also the 126-page internal Samsung memo, comparing an early Samsung smartphone with the iPhone side by side, and showing how the Samsung phone could and should be made more like the iPhone.

There was also the memo from Google to Samsung saying, in effect, "make your phones less like the iPhone or you'll get sued."

Samsung's more recent phones have been innovative and have differentiated themselves from iPhones, but it's been built on the back of profits made on phones which did copy Apple's design and, given the enormous amount of resources put by Apple into R&D, marketing, and negotiating with carriers, I'm glad that the court has recognised that.

But does this ruling not ruin the whole concept of "innovation" which keeps cropping up ?

You build a phone, i improve on, you then improve on that etc etc? This process will now be far more complicated with apple handing out licensing to everyone, driving up the prices of handsets.

Do you think that apple would have such a nice iOS if it wasnt for the competition from android over the past few years pushing them to make something better and cutting edge that would keep their customers?

Essentially apple now have a monopoly. They will come out with a new phone this september and it will probably be fantastic, and next september another new phone etc etc. and THEY will be the ones who decide what is current, what is "fantastic" and what customers will have, because they'll have this patent case to back them up against the likes of Samsung who may offer something similar on paper yes, but the iphone and GSII are completely different mobile experiences.

It will stagnate the market

The Mad Hatter

Davie89 wrote: »

But does this ruling not ruin the whole concept of "innovation" which keeps cropping up ?

Nope. It's possible to innovate without copying. Like I said, look at Samsung's current phones. Look at Windows Phone.

You build a phone, i improve on, you then improve on that etc etc? This process will now be far more complicated with apple handing out licensing to everyone, driving up the prices of handsets.

There's plenty of licensed technology in all phones at the moment, including iPhones. Stuff that's essential for the technology to work (such as 3G radios, etc.) is required by law to be licensed under Fair, Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms. Notably, several companies - including Samsung and not including Apple - are suing over FRAND patents anyway. Some other companies have charged higher prices to Apple for these licenses, which seems to contradict the "Non-Discriminatory" requirement.

Do you think that apple would have such a nice iOS if it wasnt for the competition from android over the past few years pushing them to make something better and cutting edge that would keep their customers?

Absolutely not - competition is essential. But it's not the same thing as copying.

Essentially apple now have a monopoly. They will come out with a new phone this september and it will probably be fantastic, and next september another new phone etc etc. and THEY will be the ones who decide what is current, what is "fantastic" and what customers will have, because they'll have this patent case to back them up against the likes of Samsung.

It will stagnate the market

Um, no.



It will take a lot to reverse that, and the defeat of one single manufacturer in one single lawsuit won't be enough.

blankblank

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

It will take a lot to reverse that, and the defeat of one single manufacturer in one single lawsuit won't be enough.

Probably should have been clearer, im not talking about all of the android phone market, im talking about the high end models which compete directly with the iphone, ala the GSIII/GSII.

Never again will we see the likes of the GSII from samsung, which in MY OPINION (before people start calling me a troll) was a far superior product in terms of design, software and functionality to the iphone 4 at the time, after owing both products.

Stainless_Steel

Samsung ripped Apple off. Good decision by the courts IMO.

jonnny68

Stainless_Steel wrote: »

Samsung ripped Apple off. Good decision by the courts IMO.

Bulls*it, Samsung are an innovative corporation and if anything it's the half eaten fruit who infringed

cgarrad

Apple need to focus on new products not litigation.

New iPhone has very little new (going on the leaks so far).

New iPad has a better screen but is worse in several other respects.

iTV is nowhere?

iPad mini will be a loss leader.

NetNinja

Tazium wrote: »

FWIW, Moses was the first dude with tablets.

I wonder if they had rounded edges? :pac:

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

jonnny68

For those of you saying some of this stuff existed before Apple patented it, realize this is nothing new. Apple loves to patent stuff that already exists and say they created it, look at the GUI they "borrowed" from Xerox. In 1989 Xerox filed a lawsuit against Apple for copying the look and feel of their GUI. Funny thing is Apple has now accused Android of doing the same thing they did to Xerox.

They know that Samsung have knocked them off their perch as king of smartphones and Android is light years ahead of the walled garden that is IOS.

cookie1977

Mitsubishi had their diamond touch device with pinch to zoom. I think (i could be wrong) this was shown as evidence by samsung

Mitsubishi engineer Adam Bogue, testified that he showed the Diamond Touch to Apple engineers back in 2003.

http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/14/apple-samsung-patent-trial-rebuttal-diamond-touch/

whiterebel

jonnny68 wrote: »

For those of you saying some of this stuff existed before Apple patented it, realize this is nothing new. Apple loves to patent stuff that already exists and say they created it, look at the GUI they "borrowed" from Xerox. In 1989 Xerox filed a lawsuit against Apple for copying the look and feel of their GUI. Funny thing is Apple has now accused Android of doing the same thing they did to Xerox.

They know that Samsung have knocked them off their perch as king of smartphones and Android is light years ahead of the walled garden that is IOS.

"The Xerox lawsuit was dismissed because the presiding judge dismissed most of Xerox's complaints as being inappropriate for a variety of legal reasons"

Xerox gave them permission to use things they saw in PARC, and then realised they made a complete arse of it.

cookie1977

Excellent analysis of internal Apple memo to employees from Tim Cook on the win:
http://www.jacquesmattheij.com/tim-cook-memo-line-by-line/

I particularly like and completely agree with his view of:

We value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth.

And you’re doing that by virtue of the millions upon millions of man-hours that went into the real innovations, the ones by people that did not bother to patent their ideas but that simply thought that these things are too obvious to even begin to think of patenting them. Patents are being abused by companies the world over to keep the competition at bay, not to foster innovation. A patent on a grid of rounded icons? How else would you arrange them? A bit sloppy maybe, make the corners protrude? What about that pinch to zoom thing? Any suggestions on how else any half decent developer would implement that? These are not patents on innovation, they’re patents on simple ideas and features that you didn’t even think of first but you were the first to patent.

PS I think all of these patent lawsuits (no matter who's suing whom) are for the most part ridiculous

latenia

Apple (and everyone else) would do well to remember that the company was saved by and hugely profited from piracy when it introduced the ipod. As their own website says, a 160gb ipod can hold up to 40,000 songs; I sincerely doubt that the owners of these €200 devices spent up to €40K to fill them with music from itunes. People didn't buy ipods because of the sound quality or Ives' design but because you could stuff them with as much free music as you and your friends could download.

whiterebel

latenia wrote: »

Apple (and everyone else) would do well to remember that the company was saved by and hugely profited from piracy when it introduced the ipod. As their own website says, a 160gb ipod can hold up to 40,000 songs; I sincerely doubt that the owners of these €200 devices spent up to €40K to fill them with music from itunes. People didn't buy ipods because of the sound quality or Ives' design but because you could stuff them with as much free music as you and your friends could download.

The first one could hold 1000 songs, and Apple made it accessible only through iTunes, or to add your own CDs, in an effort to stop piracy. Even today their idevices have a crippled Bluetooth system to stop the sharing of music and movies. The mp3 players before the iPod were much easier to swap music with. The iMac saved Apple, not the iPod.

murpho999

jonnny68 wrote: »

Bulls*it, Samsung are an innovative corporation and if anything it's the half eaten fruit who infringed

This makes me laugh.

A lot of Samsung supporters seem to believe that Apple about to turns us all into citizens of planet iEarth whilst Samsung are the corporate heroes making fantastic phones to protect us all from Apple's evil empire.

Please wake up both organisations are just technology companies and both are in the business of making money. Nothing more, nothing less.

Blazer

jonnny68 wrote: »

Bulls*it, Samsung are an innovative corporation and if anything it's the half eaten fruit who infringed

lol...it's amazing how stupid fanboys of whatever company they support come across regardless whether it's
Apple vs Samsung
iOS vs Android
ATI vs Nvidia
Intel vs AMD
Microsoft vs Linux and so on and on...

They just seem to regurgitiate whatever crap they read about and then take it as fact...
Wake up...just use whatever phone etc you like best and stop spouting rubbish.

The Mad Hatter

jonnny68 wrote: »

For those of you saying some of this stuff existed before Apple patented it, realize this is nothing new. Apple loves to patent stuff that already exists and say they created it, look at the GUI they "borrowed" from Xerox. In 1989 Xerox filed a lawsuit against Apple for copying the look and feel of their GUI. Funny thing is Apple has now accused Android of doing the same thing they did to Xerox.

If by "borrowed" you mean "bought". Apple paid for the Parc patents - admittedly they got it for an insanely low price, because the top brass at Xerox didn't know what a goldmine they were sitting on. Apple offered to license the infringing patents to Samsung, but Samsung said no.

Creamy Goodness

This sums up the case for me

https://mobile.twitter.com/danfrakes/status/239453665319088130

5 years ago the iPhone launched and was dismissed for its lack of buttons, but now five years later this design is obvious?

DubDJ

I knew it would play out like this. If Samsung won everyone would of said well done and the usual stuff. But because Apple won, Judges and Jury we're bribed and influenced. People saying Apple are using litigation to defeat competitors? But Samsung we're suing them too. It's a simple case, Apple think Samsung copied the design and features of their phone. A judge and jury agreed. Before this all went to trial Apple offered these patents to Samsung to use in their devices, but Samsung refused. Instead they went ahead and used them anyway without paying for them. Competition is great. But don't just go and make your phone look like the company your competing against. Do something different. That's what Apple did and it's worked out well for them so far.

I thought the ruling would stop all the bashing saying Apple compete in court, how they don't innovate. I was wrong. If Apple aren't innovating, then what have Google, Samsung or HTC brought to the table lately that's amazing and different. And don't say Notification Centre please.

blankblank

DubDJ wrote: »

I knew it would play out like this. If Samsung won everyone would of said well done and the usual stuff. But because Apple won, Judges and Jury we're bribed and influenced..

That must be some crystal ball you have there.

You dont know what would have been said if Samsung had won as they didn't.

It's not a case of which company is better than the other and which one can come up with more amazing products. The fact is Apple will now have a monopoly (at least for the time being) over the high end smart phone market until Samsung/other companies can come up with designs that don't infringe on their patents i.e rounded corners. That is not fair competition. If apple products are the supposed pinnacle of design they claim to be then why not let them stand side by side with the likes of the GSII and allow consumers make their own decision.

And this rubbish of "people were confused over which product they were buying", what a load of bull. Really, someone who buys a product in store with the name samsung on the stand/product itself, brings home the box with the wording samsung on it, has a charger with the name samsung on it, sees samsung everytime the phone is turned on. And they still think they have an apple product? Those people are clearly slaves to a brand, not informed consumers trying to make a conscious decision.

DubDJ

Davie89 wrote: »

That must be some crystal ball you have there.

You dont know what would have been said if Samsung had won as they didn't.

It's not a case of which company is better than the other and which one can come up with more amazing products. The fact is Apple will now have a monopoly (at least for the time being) over the high end smart phone market until Samsung/other companies can come up with designs that don't infringe on their patents i.e rounded corners. That is not fair competition. If apple products are the supposed pinnacle of design they claim to be then why not let them stand side by side with the likes of the GSII and allow consumers make their own decision.

And this rubbish of "people were confused over which product they were buying", what a load of bull. Really, someone who buys a product in store with the name samsung on the stand/product itself, brings home the box with the wording samsung on it, has a charger with the name samsung on it, sees samsung everytime the phone is turned on. And they still think they have an apple product? Those people are clearly slaves to a brand, not informed consumers trying to make a conscious decision.

It probably wouldn't of went to trial of Samsung has paid royalties to Apple for the use of the patents in the first place. But they refused. I don't think people should mix up both phone's. But when a phone is so close to the design of your phone, and you've spent millions on it in R&D, I think would be a little upset about it. The newer Samsungs arent so alike the iPhone now but previous models have been. I still don't think Apple have a monopoly. Still plenty of choice out there. Try a Nexus or HTC.

Tea 1000

DubDJ wrote: »

It probably wouldn't of went to trial of Samsung has paid royalties to Apple for the use of the patents in the first place. But they refused. I don't think people should mix up both phone's. But when a phone is so close to the design of your phone, and you've spent millions on it in R&D, I think would be a little upset about it. The newer Samsungs arent so alike the iPhone now but previous models have been. I still don't think Apple have a monopoly. Still plenty of choice out there. Try a Nexus or HTC.

But clever design was never something that other companies patented. They'd come up with something clever after years of R&D, put it to the market and if it worked with the consumer, get the lead in the race. Everyone else will copy, slightly modify and compete, but as you have the lead it's up to you to continue to innovate and push.
But it seems that's not the Apple way. People here praising them as if they're the only company ever who put a few years of thought into a product. What if Ford patented independent rear suspension in a hatchback back in the late 90's? All that serves is to stifle competition. Instead they ran with their innovative idea, got priased for it, enjoyed their lead, others caught up, Ford need to push ahead to keep ahead, not cry to a judge and say it's unfair that you're combined ideas from previous existing ideas should be patented so no one else can ever compete.
I don't think design patents should exist. Functional is a different story, but not design ones. What if TV companies behaved the same way?
"Sorry, you'll just have to invent a triangular TV, we already have a rectangle one with numerical sequencing for channels!"

D_BEAR

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

This sums up the case for me

https://mobile.twitter.com/danfrakes/status/239453665319088130

5 years ago the iPhone launched and was dismissed for its lack of buttons, but now five years later this design is obvious?

LG seemed to think it was obvious back in 2006.
http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/15/the-lg-ke850-touchable-chocolate/

DubDJ

Tea 1000 wrote: »

But clever design was never something that other companies patented. They'd come up with something clever after years of R&D, put it to the market and if it worked with the consumer, get the lead in the race. Everyone else will copy, slightly modify and compete, but as you have the lead it's up to you to continue to innovate and push.
But it seems that's not the Apple way. People here praising them as if they're the only company ever who put a few years of thought into a product. What if Ford patented independent rear suspension in a hatchback back in the late 90's? All that serves is to stifle competition. Instead they ran with their innovative idea, got priased for it, enjoyed their lead, others caught up, Ford need to push ahead to keep ahead, not cry to a judge and say it's unfair that you're combined ideas from previous existing ideas should be patented so no one else can ever compete.
I don't think design patents should exist. Functional is a different story, but not design ones. What if TV companies behaved the same way?
"Sorry, you'll just have to invent a triangular TV, we already have a rectangle one with numerical sequencing for channels!"

The whole rectangle thing is rediculous too. It's not that Samsung made a rectangle phone. It's that they made one so close to the look of the iPhone that made them unhappy.

And the guts of the patents in this trial we're related to function instead of design. The fact is anything Apple has brought to the table over the last few years, be it the iMac, MacBooks, iPhone or iPad, a few months to years later there are hundreds of companies using the same designs. Strikingly similar ones. I'm not saying the general shape of these things. I'm talking about everything down to colour and keyboard design. And I'm in no way saying Apple invented these things. They paid designers millions to go through these designs and find one that works. I don't think it should be fair that other companies just as big decide to skip over that process and copy what's already there.

Innovation is coming up with your own designs and ideas and reimagining whats already there. Not taking what's there and adding a new OS.

opinion guy

The only people who win from this are patent lawyers.

The simple fact is - patent law is outdated. This kind of law suit is retarded. They should all just get on with making better products

Kiith

Not too happy with the result, but it's not that surprising. The whole patent system in the US is a joke anyway. Samsung probably did use similar designs to Apple's in some of their products, but companies have been doing that forever. Is this actually going to change things?

Also, anyone who accidentally buys a Samsung phone, thinking it was an iPhone, is a ****ing moron and doesn't deserve either phone.

tallus

Tazium wrote: »

I find it odd that they can maintain their part supply trade business while all this is happening. Does this mean that Microsoft can now sue Apple for their iPad designs against Microsofts Tablet PC design? Where does it all end?

FWIW, Moses was the first dude with tablets.

Thanked for the Moses comment

whiterebel

DubDJ wrote: »

The whole rectangle thing is rediculous too. It's not that Samsung made a rectangle phone. It's that they made one so close to the look of the iPhone that made them unhappy.

And the guts of the patents in this trial we're related to function instead of design. The fact is anything Apple has brought to the table over the last few years, be it the iMac, MacBooks, iPhone or iPad, a few months to years later there are hundreds of companies using the same designs. Strikingly similar ones. I'm not saying the general shape of these things. I'm talking about everything down to colour and keyboard design. And I'm in no way saying Apple invented these things. They paid designers millions to go through these designs and find one that works. I don't think it should be fair that other companies just as big decide to skip over that process and copy what's already there.

Innovation is coming up with your own designs and ideas and reimagining whats already there. Not taking what's there and adding a new OS.

Thats why they sue. Apple pay Ives handsomely for his designs. Its not right that others just come along and copy them.

pfurey101

An American court finds in favour of an American company - wow!

Google v Apple v Samsung. Cant see Apple winning in the long term, this is not how you handle competition (and many say superior products). They have done themselves no favours outside of the US and all Apple fanboys.

Its just as well they dont make TV's!

I hope Apple are studying Nokias demise and learn from it.

Is this Betamax v VHS again? Apple being Betamax and VHS being the rest of the world.

Creamy Goodness

pfurey101 wrote: »

An American court finds in favour of an American company - wow!

apple were suing three companies in this court case

samsung electronics USA.
samsung telephony USA.
samsung electronics Korea.

it's not a case of patriotism in the slightest.

Apple and Google won't sue each other, they will settle and get on with things.

Zascar

No, Beatmax was better than VHS but unfortunately they lost.

pfurey101

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

apple were suing three companies in this court case

samsung electronics USA.
samsung telephony USA.
samsung electronics Korea.

it's not a case of patriotism in the slightest.

Thats stretching it a bit!

Apple = American (albeit built in China)
Samsung = Not American (albeit with American offices)

I thought Apple hated Google (as they hate everything non Apple) - no Google Maps, no Youtube and god knows what else.

Ive always wondered why Adobe dont start suing due to the Flash ban?

pfurey101

Zascar wrote: »

No, Beatmax was better than VHS but unfortunately they lost.

I was trying to appease the Apple fanboys, after all this is their forum.

DubDJ

pfurey101 wrote: »

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

apple were suing three companies in this court case

samsung electronics USA.
samsung telephony USA.
samsung electronics Korea.

it's not a case of patriotism in the slightest.

Thats stretching it a bit!

Apple = American (albeit built in China)
Samsung = Not American (albeit with American offices)

I thought Apple hated Google (as they hate everything non Apple) - no Google Maps, no Youtube and god knows what else.

Ive always wondered why Adobe dont start suing due to the Flash ban?

Why would they sue Apple? It's up to them what they put on their phone. They didn't want flash, and as Adobe has discontinued mobile flash it turned out to be the right decision, so they didn't install it on their devices. I rarely ever need flash for anything. Deleting the Google apps is like a new feature of iOS 6 for me. Regular updates to their apps is a good thing.