Related
looks like this will get nasty
We always knew the Apple / Samsung lawsuit would produce some major fireworks, and Samsung just lit off a corker: the company filed a motion Friday night asking Apple to turn over the iPhone 5 and iPad 3 as part of the discovery process. Seriously! Samsung claims that it needs to see Apple’s future products because devices like the Droid Charge and Galaxy Tab 10.1 will presumably be in the market at the same time as the iPhone 5 and iPad 3, and Samsung’s lawyers want to evaluate any possible similarities so they can prepare for further potential legal action from Apple. It’s ballsy, but it’s not totally out of the blue: the move comes just a few days after the judge ordered Samsung to hand over pre-production samples of the Droid Charge, Infuse 4G, Galaxy S II, and Galaxy Tab 10.1 and 8.9 so Apple could determine if those products should also be part of the lawsuit and potentially file a motion to block them from the market.
Now, the key difference between the two requests is that Samsung had already announced its products, while Apple has maintained its traditional iron silence about future devices. But there’s some additional nuance involved as well, as well as some bigger-picture implications — let’s walk through the entire situation, shall we?
Last week, Apple asked the court to order Samsung to hand over samples of the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Galaxy Tab 8.9, the Galaxy S II, the Infuse 4G, and the Droid Charge so Cupertino could figure out whether they should be part of the lawsuit — and whether to ask for a preliminary injunction preventing Samsung’s products from going on sale.
The court sided with Apple, in large part because Samsung had already released review units and photos of everything listed. In fact, the ruling came just days after Samsung handed out thousands of Galaxy Tab 10.1s at Google I/O, so really the only unreleased product on the list is the Tab 8.9 — a product that was announced in March and has been handled on video.
The court imposed one important condition on Apple in order to protect Samsung’s competitive edge, however: only Cupertino’s outside lawyers are allowed to look at Samsung’s pre-release hardware, not anyone from Apple itself. (Of course, there’s nothing stopping someone at Apple from running out and picking up a Droid Charge or Infuse 4G at retail, but pre-production samples that come from Samsung under this order are protected.)
Apple hasn’t yet filed for that preliminary injunction, nor has it said it’s going to anytime soon.
Now, given that most of the Samsung products on the list were already either available or fully disclosed, it wasn’t surprising that Apple won — in fact, it’s more interesting that Samsung had chose to fight back on such a minor issue in the first place, since it had so little at stake. (And it’s also somewhat interesting that Apple even asked for Samsung’s products in discovery instead of just filing for an injunction from the get-go, since they had all been announced already.) It’s a tell: no little compromises means no big compromises are in the works. So now let’s step through Samsung’s motion to see the iPhone 5 and iPad 3 and try to get a sense of what’s actually happening in context.
Samsung’s asking for a court order requiring Apple to produce “the final, commercial versions” of the next-generation iPhone and iPad and their respective packaging by June 13, 2011, so it can evaluate whether there’ll be confusion between Samsung and Apple’s future products. If the final versions aren’t available, Samsung wants “the most current version of each to be produced instead.”
Samsung doesn’t actually know Apple is planning to release a new iPhone or iPad; the motion is based on “internet reports” and “Apple’s past practice.” Obviously this is a critical difference between Apple’s request and Samsung’s — Samsung had already disclosed its new products, and Apple didn’t ask for anything that wasn’t already announced.
Samsung says it has to see the next-gen iPhone and iPad because it believes those are the products that will actually be on the market against future Samsung devices, so it has to be prepared for Apple’s potential motion for a preliminary injunction. That’s kind of a stretch: Apple can’t really file for a preliminary injunction based on potential confusion with unannounced, unreleased products, so Apple’s lawyers will almost certainly focus on confusion with the company’s existing products.
Indeed, Apple told Samsung on May 23 that any potential motion for a preliminary injunction “would be based on products Apple currently has in the market.”
Samsung says that doesn’t matter because Apple tends to discontinue previous products when it launches new ones, and it has to be prepared for what might be in the market when and if Apple actually files its motion. This is also a bit strange, since Apple kept both the iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS on the market after launching new models. You can bet Apple will point that out.
Samsung’s also promised to abide by the same rules as Apple — only its lawyers will get to see anything Apple produces, not anyone at Samsung. (Or us, unfortunately.)
Lastly, Samsung says “fundamental fairness” requires Apple to give up its future products, since Samsung had to do the same. Tellingly, Samsung doesn’t reference any precedent or law to bolster this line of argument — it’s basically just asking the court to be nice.
So that’s Samsung’s motion. It’s pretty strange, if you think about it: Samsung is arguing that Apple might file for a preliminary injunction, and that it might happen sometime after Apple might release a new iPhone and iPad. That’s a lot of assumptions — and Apple can basically kill this entire line of argument dead by filing for that injunction Monday morning and saying that Samsung’s already-announced products should be blocked from market because they’ll cause confusion with the iPhone 4 and iPad 2 for however many months remain before the new versions are released. Neither the court nor Samsung really need to see Apple’s unreleased products to deal with that. And even if Samsung wins, Apple will definitely appeal the decision, putting the entire case on hold while things get sorted out… a process that will almost certainly stretch past the iPhone 5′s expected release in the fall, rendering this entire argument somewhat moot. And what happens if Samsung eventually gets the iPhone 5 and determines that the Droid Charge infringes Apple’s patents and trademarks? Is it going to change the Droid Charge? The potential outcomes aren’t entirely favorable here.
So why is Samsung even pursuing this? I think it’s a calculated gamble for additional leverage. Apple and Samsung held negotiations for a year before giving up and heading to the courts, and I’m reliably informed that there haven’t been any substantive settlement discussions since Apple first filed its complaint. That means talks have been at a standstill for a long time now, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Samsung was trying to put some additional heat on Apple to try and kick negotiations back into gear. It’s an interesting and aggressive move in its own right, but it also highlights the fact that neither Apple nor Samsung have addressed the actual merits of their complaints in formal replies — this is a minor skirmish before the real battle begins. We’ll see if this sideshow accomplishes anything beyond clever lawyerly maneuvering, but for right now it’s clear that Apple and Samsung aren’t planning to back down anytime soon.
click here !!!!
Doesn't samsung give apple most of the iphones parts...
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA Premium App
Jmatch said:
Doesn't samsung give apple most of the iphones parts...
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yup, I wonder if apple's lawyers took that into consideration before they brought up these charges
Wow Cheezynutz Nice long synopsis. Some of your ideas make sense about the tactics of these 2 companies, but here is the Gist of the whole thing:
Apple knows their market share is waning in the cell phone market so, trying to throw roadblocks is one tactic to delay the inevitable.
Apple has little chance to win this since the market that makes the difference is outside the USA It is all of the world and our court rulings no matter the outcome will have little to no bearing on that market. Compound that, along with some of the development problems Apple is having causing release delays (now 1st Q 2012) just translates into Android as a whole is like a Tsunami taking over everything. Beating on Samsung is nothing more than a side show, the real show is watching if Android consolidates their app market into more cohesive products and less version sensitive. That in itself will be the straw that breaks Apple's back. The hardware out there is not going to be the game changer at this point ads all of them are really very good.
Legal wrangling is not going to change any of this dynamic....... so to me I think Samsung actually wins all because the Apple legal team made the original demand to have access to Samsung products.......... Just like a chess Gambit Losing a piece early ends up giving you a winning position in the long run. Apple's legal team fell for it.... too .........And That is the most amusing part of all this....
Jmatch, yes samsung makes some of the components as does Foxconn (China) but I believe the final assembly is done elsewhere. Samsung pretty much has a lock on amoled
Great posting thanks !!!
That's the irony in this all, Samsung is actually apples provider. Lol and apple goes and sues them, that's really a dumb move on apples part.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA Premium App
I bet Samsung loses this one. IPad 2 was launched last month and Samsung is asking for non announced products, apple may release a IPhone 4S instead a IPhone 5, both are 5th generation. While Samsung products were announced and being released.
the fight between these 2 COs will never end.
Jmatch said:
Doesn't samsung give apple most of the iphones parts...
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The SoC's Apple uses are done on Samsungs Fab process just like their own, it's a different market from phones to phone parts.
lol x10
It is called discovery, right?
Apple products are very similar to previous versions so I doubt Samsung will have anything to gain besides annoying Apple. If it wasn't for the iPod touch I wouldn't even have anything to do with Apple.
Apple are arrogant regarding these kind of matters. "I have the genius I have the power" ... but that power without the manpower, the raw materials, the technology ... is nothing.
Meanwhile Apple products are churned out in Chinese factories, with poor pay and appalling conditions for the assembly workers.
It must be a relief for them to know that Apple have such a big legal team watching their backs. Oh, wait...
DirkGently1 said:
Meanwhile Apple products are churned out in Chinese factories, with poor pay and appalling conditions for the assembly workers.
It must be a relief for them to know that Apple have such a big legal team watching their backs. Oh, wait...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung is out of Korea, and has shops in Korea and China. I don't think the conditions are that much better, plus it's foxconn that assembles the products. Apple only pays for the assembly. There really isn't a lot in this world anymore that isn't made in Chinese factories, with poor pay and appalling conditions for the assembly workers...
Just released Today. Repost from http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1135896
I figured it get more exposure here than there.
Apple's newly awarded patent gives it ownership of the capacitive multitouch interface, spelling big trouble for rival smartphone makers, say patent experts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Apple could conceivably restrict makers of touchscreen smartphones, tablets, and other mobile devices from selling their products in the U.S. More likely is that Apple would reach a settlement with such competitors and start licensing its patented technology for a tidy new income stream.
If Apple does decide to play hardball and squeeze out rivals rather than set up cross-licenses, the source said, it's entirely possible that a court could find it in the public interest to scrap the patent rather than allow a monopoly on what has become a defining interface for an entire category of consumer devices."
Here is The Patent:
This changes everything. Now Apple can rest peacefully about it's continued existence in the face of Android's dominance in the smartphone market. Apple can require Google to license it's multi-touch tech and possibly throttle Android's dominance.
Wow apple... Yet another low blow to the Android community, how can they patent the idea of multiple inputs on a touch screen?
That's like putting a patent on fire...
Sent from my Zio using XDA Premium App
I'm gonna patent keyboards, then y'all be really screwed
NewZJ said:
I'm gonna patent keyboards, then y'all be really screwed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
haha for real huh? With this patent and the iPhone 5 coming out i guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.
How can you patent something that already exists elsewhere?
PharmCAT said:
How can you patent something that already exists elsewhere?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It didn't exist when Apple applied for the patent. 3 years ago Apple started working on multi-touch display tech and it was unheard of until Apple revealed work on it. They just now got awarded the patent. It took 3 years of the the system to get to it.
This is really nothing new, companies do this all the time. In order to create x86 base cpu cores, AMD licenses out x86 and other instruction sets from Intel, Intel licenses out x64 instruction sets from AMD, and there are others to note.
If apple decides to sue everyone and becomes ridiculous and extremely lame, then it doesn't have to mean its the end of the world.. who knows, maybe someone such as htc will design a new line of touch screens that are superior to capacitive touch
Now is it for multi touch displays in general, or is it for like 2 finger touch or something like that?
Edit-It looks like it's for 2 finger touch, N and M being the amount of fingers. To get out of the license fee, they could try to use displays that use more than 2 fingers if the licensing fee is too much.
wow. Putting patent on multi touch screen is like Toyota (other auto maker) patenting number of tires on cars.
Sounds about right. I just hope this doesn't mean a price hike for non-Apple consumers. And I especially hope this doesn't somehow allow them to monopolize the touchscreen market.
Sent from my Inc using Nil's Business Gingersense. Now that's Incredible.
I know this sounds awful for us android users but it could be the greatest thing. With phone makers not allowed to use capaacitive screens, this almost forces them to use Surface Wave (SAW) screens. They also allow multi touch but are completely different. If you look them up they seem even better than capactive screens. They were considered unpracticle for phones because they were not resisitant to dust/water/dirt (meaning this stuff would just linger on the screen). But some phone makers have succesfully made covers, per say, for these that completely wipes out this problem. One major advantage is that they are scratch resistant and completely finger print resisitant. Also, while capacative screens only let through about 85% of the light, these screens let through about 92% on the low end. Some high-end screens have even let through 98%. This allows for theses screens to have the absolute best display/resolution. Look here to see the great specs.
http://www.softtouch.co.in/saw.htm
e334 said:
If apple decides to sue everyone and becomes ridiculous and extremely lame, then it doesn't have to mean its the end of the world.. who knows, maybe someone such as htc will design a new line of touch screens that are superior to capacitive touch
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kind of like how some Japanese companies are investing in alternatives to rare earth minerals which the Chinese are considering restricting. There's always a way around an obstacle. HTC, the best phone maker in the world, will no doubt have an alternative to capacitive displays. It might be a few pennies more expensive than current displays, but would certainly allow the industry to continue on.
<insert your favorite lawyer joke here>
One day you will come to realize the scope of this idiocy and then you might even want to kick all the lawyer's asses, but it might be too late already. The rest of the world will be speaking Chinese.
P.S.
MartyLK said:
It didn't exist when Apple applied for the patent. 3 years ago Apple started working on multi-touch display tech and it was unheard of until Apple revealed work on it. They just now got awarded the patent. It took 3 years of the the system to get to it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Extreme BS. http://cs.nyu.edu/~jhan/ftirtouch/
If you can't beat the competition, buy/patent it.
Microsoft Surface anyone?
They had the first prototype back in 2003.
I wonder how their patent differs...
Sometimes I wish I was a hitman. Id eliminate the idiots allowing these patents..
#FlameBait
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
xaccers said:
Microsoft Surface anyone?
They had the first prototype back in 2003.
I wonder how their patent differs...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Almost all these new patents are absolutely not new. The problem being the FUBARed U.S. patent system. In a sane system, you do no grant patents without any review like USPTO and do not tell the competitors "go sue them in case you have objections". (Will rather non commment the SW patents nonsense.)
Not to mention, that the language has become completely incomprehensible in order to obscure the nature and scope of the "patent" as much as possible for future patent racketeering purposes.
Just another example (probably, at least, though I'm not certain) of the patent and copyright systems running amok.
This better not put a major dent in the Android market. Hopefully at worst it'll force Android phones to become even more competitive.
http://m.engadget.com/default/artic...s-4g-dr/&category=classic&icid=eng_latest_art
---"if this thing holds, and it's determined that the aforesaid products may well indeed be infringing on Apple's rights, Sammy could be forced to yank those products from US shelves within a couple of months."---
Wanted to give a heads up for those thinking about getting the infuse that you might have to get it soon. Damn I hate patent wars like this. I hope apple loses... hard
if apple wants to sue samsung over the look and function of the tw launcher app drawer as it is similar to the ios home screen they may as well sue lg for stealing samsungs look as well. apple has been stealing form and function from other companies from day one, the only reason it is an issue for apple is that samsung makes popular devices.
Apple's ripping off Android's swipe down notifications too. Then they have the nerve to say that Samsung is ripping them off. Funny how hypocrisy works...
Man, I was just about to post this. Its completely ridiculous. I hope apple loses hard as well.
has anyone seen apple's keynote for ios5? nearly 8 of their 10 "new" features are ripped from android. features that google has had for a few years now..
samsung is a much bigger company than apple. apple only has there marketing and public image. this wont hurt samsung one bit. on the other hand if google gets involved and if samsung wins the 20 some odd pattent infringments in cell technology that they are suing apple over then apple could be crushed pretty hard.
this is apples business strategy. steal all the great i deas they can and portray an image that the opposite is happening. they have been doing this as long as they have been in business. everything from there aesthetics to the technology in there products to there os's take advantage of the better ideas out there that already existed while they put a stupid half eaten apple on it and tell the world they are inovators.
I understand there a few topics about the court cases including Apple and Samsung, but I wanted to point something out that I thought funny/satisfying.
Edit: I realize this is more of a rant. Sorry!
Ever since the first court case when Apple sued, I had an anger in me. Solely because Apple has been claiming that Samsung couldn't have progressed to where the company has today if it weren't for the fact that they "stole" the iPhone design. I have a couple of things to say to that.
1) As for the design, I can't possibly see how another phone can get in trouble for "copying" the iPhone. Something as simple as a black, rectangular phone with a single button could not be copied unless the company specifically AIMED to replicate the iPhone, and I doubt that is the case with Samsung.
2) About 25% of the components in the iPhone are supplied by Samsung... Lol
3, The satisfying piece of news) Somewhat old news, but for those of you who missed it, Samsung wanted to submit a document as court evidence to battle the accusation of "copying the iPhone", but for an unknown reason, it was declined. Despite being declined, Samsungs legal team went against the order of the judge, and ended up publishing the document publicly. What was the document? A document showing the design for a PRE-iPHONE device, that actually, does look very, very similar to the iPhone. In fact, SEVERAL devices resembling an iPhone, all of them designed in 2006, before the iPhone release.
I love this. Not so much because I'm an android fanboy, but more so because I DESPISE Apple (That's another discussion in itself). These documents are like saying F you to Apple...
I wish I can link you guys to the articles and pictures, but my account is relatively new. Please do the research (if you'd like) and look at the pictures yourselves if you haven't! Search "allthingsd samsung goes public" on Google and click the first link.
TL;DR - Samsung f**ks over Apple
Samsung cant makes phones to save themselves
Motorola ftw!
Tl,dr samsung may have won but its not over
PepperGardener said:
Samsung cant makes phones to save themselves
Motorola ftw!
Tl,dr samsung may have won but its not over
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol. Well although I do like Samsung, and not so much Motorola, although they do make good phones. Just wanted to exemplify the fact
that the satisfaction came from my hatred towards Apple, not the love towards Samsung.
TL;DR - I hate Apple.
PepperGardener said:
Samsung cant makes phones to save themselves
Motorola ftw!
Tl,dr samsung may have won but its not over
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you really think?
PepperGardener said:
Samsung cant makes phones to save themselves
Motorola ftw!
Tl,dr samsung may have won but its not over
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Psch, motorola makes good hardware maybe. Their software is crap. Ever heard of anyone actually saying 'Yeah I think I'd like motoblur on my phone!' Yeah me neither. Samsung has got software down and their CPU/GPU is always ahead of the game. Both are better than apple though, lets agree on that.
PepperGardener said:
Samsung cant makes phones to save themselves
Motorola ftw!
Tl,dr samsung may have won but its not over
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL. yeah rite xD
Thank God it's not just me
I was thinking about commenting on Motoblur, but I decided to not stray away from the topic... even though we apparently have. (But that's okay)
I'm glad I'm not alone, never really thought I was though, and yes I agree totally. Apple can suck it
Personally i think samsungs ui does look too much like the apple ui. Look at the uk case where the judge ruled that on first impression they do look similar but that after using both he decided overall the experience was different. Apples main argument is that the first impression people have is that they look the same. To be honest I actually agree this point. Samsung haven't done enough to look unique.
This is the only point I agree apple have a case with, i think most of their cases are stupidly overblown to the pont of appearing petty. The actual patents that apple are trying to claim are to me not generally what i would term innovative enough to warrant being patentable inventions. I think this should be handled as a copyright case not a patent case.
One of the things people fail to mention is samsungs allegations that apple are infringing their patents. The samsung patents to me seem much more valid than the fluff apple are claiming as patents. If apple expect companies to accept their patents they should respect the patents of others.
Theres no mystery as to why the evidence was rejected. The judge had given a time that evidence should be submitted by, samsung tried to submit it too late. Theres nothing sinister the judge had set rules that had to be followed.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
What annoys me is the fact its a mobile phone, there isnt a lot that you can change to make a touch screen phone look loads different from another. They are basically all the same shape, they all have an ear piece which has to be at the top and buttons have to be at the bottom. As for the look of the ui same goes, a desktop on a computer is basically the same, most used apps at the bottom just like quick launch on PC then other apps spaced evenly on the rest of the screen. With apps been available on iOS and android then that makes them look more alike. Its all bs and apple piss me off.
Sent from my Jelly Beaned Galaxy S2
How can anyone love or hate pieces of black plastic or companies producing them, it always amazed me. Use your feelings towards some things worthy of it. Anyway, Nokia was the first in the late 90s with some proto smartphones with touch screens. They completely screwed it and that's a shame.
Closed
Redundant thread and wrong section
What do you think will happen cause apple won the patent thing
The infuse is no longer for sale. They can't retroactively confiscate the devices people have already purchased, so the ruling will have no effect on the Infuse at all.
They'll go after future sales next. Then they'll go after the Android OS itself. I have always hated Apple products, too proprietary for me. One the bright side, it's not over. Samsung will appeal that Apple has abused the patent laws in order to monopolize the market, which is true.
I don't see flat screen TV or monitor law suits out there for "copying". Job's biggest feat was convincing brainless zombies that they needed what he was selling...which is junk.
I will go back to Balckberry or a Motorola flip phone before I ever buy Apple crap!
Jep56 said:
They'll go after future sales next. Then they'll go after the Android OS itself. I have always hated Apple products, too proprietary for me. One the bright side, it's not over. Samsung will appeal that Apple has abused the patent laws in order to monopolize the market, which is true.
I don't see flat screen TV or monitor law suits out there for "copying". Job's biggest feat was convincing brainless zombies that they needed what he was selling...which is junk.
I will go back to Balckberry or a Motorola flip phone before I ever buy Apple crap!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
... and all the people said Amen.
showdowknigh said:
What do you think will happen cause apple won the patent thing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It will be dragged out in court with appeals for awhile. Then one of the manufacturers will pay for patents so they can use whatever it is they have copied. I don't think much will change but i could be wrong.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using xda premium
nothing will change on the consumer end, maybe prices will go up to cover royalties or whatnot, but in the end google will still make android available and companies will use it. on the plus side google owns motorolas patents.. and they are suing apple.!
Jep56 said:
They'll go after future sales next. Then they'll go after the Android OS itself. I have always hated Apple products, too proprietary for me. One the bright side, it's not over. Samsung will appeal that Apple has abused the patent laws in order to monopolize the market, which is true.
I don't see flat screen TV or monitor law suits out there for "copying". Job's biggest feat was convincing brainless zombies that they needed what he was selling...which is junk.
I will go back to Balckberry or a Motorola flip phone before I ever buy Apple crap!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah apple is crap
I'm so lost on this topic
*becoming a flashaholic*
Yeah Google get crapple....
Sent from my SGH-I997 using xda app-developers app
Ruling doesn't mean anything for the infuse except they can no longer sale a phone in the US that is already not being sold.
Apple will probably never licence their technology to any android device purely because it is running android. They offered to licence their tech to samsung but at the price they wanted Samsung would make no money at all on the devices.
Apple's main enemy isn't the phone makes, it is Google. Google is just the boss fight while the phone manufacturers are the mini bosses that are blocking the way.
Jep56 said:
...
I will go back to Balckberry or a Motorola flip phone before I ever buy Apple crap!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You and me both brotha!!! Hell I'll rock my old HTC Tilt!!!!
http://www.aforadio.com/index.php/s...30-trucks-full-of-5-cents-coins-aforadio-com/
Sent from my SGH-i997 using xda app-developers app
Goneeuro said:
http://www.aforadio.com/index.php/s...30-trucks-full-of-5-cents-coins-aforadio-com/
Sent from my SGH-i997 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://en.paperblog.com/samsung-pays-apple-1-billion-sending-30-trucks-full-of-5-cents-coins-294795/
it's a fake story. too bad though.
Goneeuro said:
http://www.aforadio.com/index.php/s...30-trucks-full-of-5-cents-coins-aforadio-com/
Sent from my SGH-i997 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That literally made me laugh!!!!
Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2
Figured it was fake. Was funny though.
Sent from my SGH-i997 using xda app-developers app
Goneeuro said:
Figured it was fake. Was funny though.
Sent from my SGH-i997 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah i wanted to believe it but 30 trucks would barely be a down payment not to mention somebody would have noticed if they were to organized getting 20 billion coins together at the same time. people sometimes fail to realized how big a number that is.
i did a little math figuring the payload of a trailer would be exceeded long before the volume of the trailer in copper and found the mass of a nickel is 5 grams. makes the math pretty easy, the maximum legal load of a road going vehicle is 80,000 lbs which is roughly 36,000kg as you can see 100,000,000 is way more than 30 times the weight capacity of a truck and trailer. it would take well over 3000 loads of nickels after you subtract the weight of the truck and trailer from the total allowable weight. actually for a truck and trailer it's probably more like 4500 loads.
but if it were me and i could come up with a way to get a bunch of physical money together at once i would totally pay the first few million that way. but not in nickels or pennies. nickels contain a lot of copper and more importantly they contain a reasonable amount of nickel and are likely worth more than the face value. it would be a gold mine of scrap metal however illegal. pennies can be worth triple the face value if they are older from when they were made from copper and many of these pennies are still in regular circulation.
if i really wanted to pull a good prank i'd go for money that was likely to depreciate rapidly in relation to the american dollar and pay in papper bills, easier to ship than coins and has no value other than the face value, then see how long it takes them to deposit it all.
crash822 said:
Ruling doesn't mean anything for the infuse except they can no longer sale a phone in the US that is already not being sold.
Apple will probably never licence their technology to any android device purely because it is running android. They offered to licence their tech to samsung but at the price they wanted Samsung would make no money at all on the devices.
Apple's main enemy isn't the phone makes, it is Google. Google is just the boss fight while the phone manufacturers are the mini bosses that are blocking the way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hahaha good analogy.
I did find out that car toys (local electronic store in wa) still offers the infuse for sale for free on contract. I was surprised.
Sent from my SGH-i997 using Tapatalk 2
Dani897 said:
yeah i wanted to believe it but 30 trucks would barely be a down payment not to mention somebody would have noticed if they were to organized getting 20 billion coins together at the same time. people sometimes fail to realized how big a number that is.
i did a little math figuring the payload of a trailer would be exceeded long before the volume of the trailer in copper and found the mass of a nickel is 5 grams. makes the math pretty easy, the maximum legal load of a road going vehicle is 80,000 lbs which is roughly 36,000kg as you can see 100,000,000 is way more than 30 times the weight capacity of a truck and trailer. it would take well over 3000 loads of nickels after you subtract the weight of the truck and trailer from the total allowable weight. actually for a truck and trailer it's probably more like 4500 loads.
but if it were me and i could come up with a way to get a bunch of physical money together at once i would totally pay the first few million that way. but not in nickels or pennies. nickels contain a lot of copper and more importantly they contain a reasonable amount of nickel and are likely worth more than the face value. it would be a gold mine of scrap metal however illegal. pennies can be worth triple the face value if they are older from when they were made from copper and many of these pennies are still in regular circulation.
if i really wanted to pull a good prank i'd go for money that was likely to depreciate rapidly in relation to the american dollar and pay in papper bills, easier to ship than coins and has no value other than the face value, then see how long it takes them to deposit it all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WOW!!!!
Apple... :banghead:
Do you think Apple should be able to patent a natural gesture, such as pinch to zoom and swiping across a home screen? That's ridiculous. And what the hell is with the millions owed over using similar icons? YOU CAN'T PATENT AN ICON WITH A MUSIC NOTE, APPLE.
Rage is over
the thing that gets me is that apple and ms stole the gui with pointer navigation and mouse control from xerox. not to mention all the prior existing art in sci-fi movies of touch interfaces and two point navigation of images (though in movies it's often 3d holograms that use two point manipulation). every artist and engineer with an imagination knew we would get to a point with touch integration and intuitive controls for 30+ years, tablets were in 2001 Space Odyssey in the 1960's, they were in star trek tng with a remarkable resemblance to a nook or ipad http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVqHoGKQXLI tablets with stylus navigation looking similar to a very large palm pilot were used in the original series for the captains log, they were called electronic clipboards. and in tng were called a personal acess display device aka a "PADD" (coincidence?) and countless other examples in b movies not to mention microsoft introduced a tablet prototype in the year 2001 that aside from performance had just about all the ideas we see today. it's only natural for people to want to interact with computers like they interact with the world and for developers to want to create these things, the ideas are actually pretty old but the processing power wasn't afordable and battery friendly for a long time. i can remember having conversations with my brother as teenagers about the ideas of two point scaling and touch screens which is all the "pinch" is but touch screens were super expensive back then and i have no idea if they even supported multi touch. anyone who's ever thought about geometry or perspective could conceptualize it, how can someone patent that? samsung just had a week defense team because apple and microsoft beat cases like this pretty regularly, only they usually buy the other company to posses the patents, it's much easier (also google likely bought motorola for this reason, to not only posses patents to licence with the os but to sue apple for infringement resulting in licenses being issued to level the playing field). apple brought ideas to the mass market in the iphone sure but they didn't conceptualize it first and i'm certain they weren't the first to program it successfully either, it's not exactly theoretical physics we're talking about. apple is defending against it's own tactics which are taking good ideas that are already out there in the technology world and bringing them to the public. meanwhile they refuse to pay royalties for all the technologies they use. they think they should be able to pay less or nothing at all for using others patents based on their popularity.
i think it was quoted that apple was asking samsung for $40 per device to pay for licensing and samsung was ask $16 for the patents they hold. apple said they don't pay $16 to any company like it's an entitlement for them to pay less even though it is considered a fair price in the market. then they ask the unfair price of $40 based on the idea that the masses of ill informed consumers could mistake anything with a touch screen for an apple product? wtf apple! and in all of this they still rely on samsung hardware to keep up with the market. rumor is the i5 will have an exynos processor or an apple branded processor based on exynos 32 nm dies. so obviously they know samsung makes superior arm based processors.
edit: as far as the interface similarities go, well i dont see a problem with side by side pages, it's the same gesture you use when you read a book. the icon style and mms do look kinda iphone like but the idea that consumers saw that and bought the samsung is stupid. apple claims they lost $2.4 billion or something to galaxy s sales because of the alegidely infringed artwork is absurd. they lost sale to android because android is awesome. so many sales went to the sgs series becasue it had a good feel and it was the fastest device on the market, it was far from perfect but the touch screen was responsive and the glass was hard and smooth. if anything the of software changes samsung implimented to android the things that sold weren't the art it was the convieniences, the mms application is better integrate with contacts, you select contacts not type them, you slide for call/mms rather than go through another layer of menu. i know for me i bought an iphone 3g knowing about the g1 already only because i didn't have cash to buy a phone off contract, i wanted a smart phone that wasn't an iphone specifically an android but no suitable alternative was available on att! how can you put a figure on lost revenue when you can't know why people made x or y decision? it's not like the galaxy s was a cheaper alternative to where people said i want an iphone but this makes more sense. the captivate launched at $300 on contract though it quickly dropped to $200. how many galaxy s sale were because using the phone insired them to move up from a feature phone? how many people legitimately wanted an iphone but couldn't get one because apple refused to cater to t-mobile and sprint for so long? how many peowould actually say the sgs woudn't have been atractive if it weren't for the icons? how many people had iphones and got fed up with the control of the market, tethering, lack of bluetooth other than audio (what was with that? feature phones had better bt integration than ios2) slow network speeds, no mms, and countless other gripes of ios compared to the lesser known competition? the truth is apple in there hubris made the iphone too elite and too limited in features for most of the market and they have poluted their own minds to think they deserve the sales of the competition. it's actually insane to put a dollar value on sales they lost mostly based on what they failed to provide to people.