yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Galaxy S III General] LJE:
A rational debate?

The only thing to discuss here is why ANYONE is still supporting a company that wants to destroy consumers options and force them to buy THEIR product.

Samsung made a smart choice by copying the look of the iPhone to a certain point and appealing to those that wanted a better looking iPhone.

It was bigger and better.

It wasn't deceiving anyone as you clearly knew you weren't buying an iPhone as it had 'SAMSUNG' written across the top of the phone.

These patent laws that stop people from copying from someone that copied from others, needs to be stopped.

Apple now is suing Samsung for the S3 being able to click on numbers in emails...

Seriously?

They really think they're the only ones that are allowed to do this?

I remember my youngest boy one day getting all the toys he could in the corner and not letting his brothers play with them...

It was the old "mine.. mine... that's mine" (crying) as his brothers tried to play with them.

I punished him for 5 mins for not sharing and then he cheered up and played with his brothers.

Someone should punish apple for acting like a greedy little f****** kid.

Suing someone for clicking on a number in an email??? That's ridiculous.

That's still trolling bro.

I kinda want to use it as my sig. ;)
[Galaxy S III General] thesponz:
Hey I don't really share your opinion on everything but the way you write and the points you make mean that I don't mind reading it. You may be one of intelligent ones in here.

The fact is though that no matter how many times Apple do this they will NEVER be able to force people to buy their products, especially people like us. So why worry about it. Just don't buy an iPhone and be happy.

As for the concept of clicking on a number in an email etc and launching the dialer or contacts list etc. If they genuinely came up with that and have a patent for it then there's nothing Samsung can do.
[Galaxy S III General] on2a:
Normally companies use their patents in a defensive nature, i.e. To counter sue when they are attacked in court.

By going so aggressively against Samsung I form the following views about Apple, in their current state:

1. They are scared of Samsung - and the market force it is becoming

2. Their upcoming products are at best only iterative (as opposed to revolutionary)

3. They are scared of losing customers

There is a very thin line between innovation and copying. The Apple of old would address this by innovation. This Apple can only sue...

I've lost respect for them. I hope they suffer in the marketplace but I'm not naive enough to think any significant number of customers will boycott their products.

Still, I'll convince as many friends and family to do so.

As someone else said, they want to lock down the mobile market because they made a break through phone and tablet..
[Galaxy S III General] jult:
They are jealous, envious, and lazy. They have known all along that Samsung is a really dangerous player for them, because Samsung has existed much longer in very high quality consumer hardware/electronics than Apple has. I think Apple is showing its true lack of innovative power and very weak ego in these battles.

Samsung has never needed these fights, because their products spoke a thousand words already. They know how good they are at innovating and they're much more lenient towards filing for such vague and obscure patents because they have been doing this way longer than Apple has.

Apple is an arrogant spoiled little child on the schoolyard playground picking on the smart kid for being better in class, Samsung is a proud and settled player behaving like a grown-up in its field of expertise.

Their TFT/LCD-screens have always been a breath of clean air in between most other ****ty manufacturers for years. They're a reputable force of innovation in pro consumer hardware, and they have been that way before Apple was anything.
[Galaxy S III General] thesponz:
I sort of agree with this. But for as long as Samsung has been around they've only managed to get themselves a reputation for making slightly better than average hardware and swamping as many categories as possible.

Apple makes a far tighter range of products and has got THE most loyal customers of any tech brand and is now the most cash rich and valuable company ever. They haven't got where they have by being stupid or petty.

I've persuaded a couple of people to move to android since I got my SGS3 but one of them has already gone back. My mum!

For her, Android is just too complicated and the apps she had on IOS were just better than the android equivalent. In fact some of the apps weren't compatible with the SGS3.

Actually, that's one thing I do hate about Android, why is it so hard to get the latest software versions rolled out. Surely there's a way of identifying certain hardware guidelines that manufactures could follow that would allow stock android to run properly from day one. That drives me nuts.

My SGS3 with CM10 is brilliant.... almost. I think that's my only gripe. And as great as the phone is, touchwizz sucks compared to stock android.
[Galaxy S III General] CuBz90:
Apple was a great company at one point, that's how they became so big, but they're letting themselves down and it's affecting their own market.
[Galaxy S III General] Theshawty:
Then Steve Jobs turned mentally insane and decided to try to crush Android while stealing stuff from it and patenting it as their own stuff.
[Galaxy S III General] JediNinjafication:
I almost peed myself..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAtje5weAU0&feature=youtube_gdata_player
[Galaxy S III General] DeadSOL:
Please don't! :P
[Galaxy S III General] JediNinjafication:
You could have someone to point and laugh at. ..
[Galaxy S III General] anamika:
Actually I once had a phone exactly like that i. e. speaker on the otherside of screen and it had touch and gesture support and slide to open way before iphone was even born... it was from Neonode...

Sent from a Galaxy far far away and beyond any iDevice
[Galaxy S III General] DeadSOL:
Aww, no! I already point and laugh at the crApple fanboys! :D I'm not picking on one of my own intelligent people! :highfive:
[Galaxy S III General] JediNinjafication:
My roommate has crApple and I give her s**t everyday and read her all the news send her the pics from xda all the time.
[Galaxy S III General] jult:
Hmm. I really have to disagree with that view. Slightly better than average? They've been at the forefront of almost ALL their businesses in the computer, hardware and electronics fields for decades!

Apple's petty jealousy is a minor nuisance to them. Most people don't really know this, but I recommend you to read up on them here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Group for a true reality-check..
[Galaxy S III General] tweetyfiestuky:
Apple sucks

Enviado desde mi GT-I9300 usando Tapatalk 2
[Galaxy S III General] radeonxt:
so says the court with jury of your peers and that peers was obviously just for the american company.

and peers who aren't experts at legalities and patents and such.

:victory:
[Galaxy S III General] JediNinjafication:
Peers that drive past the apple headquarters every single day. Peers that receive how many tax dollars a year. If I were Samsung my lawyers would be fired for not getting the case moved to a different jurisdiction.

If I were to commit a huge high profile murder my case wouldn't be held where I did it due to bias. Same thing in this case. Amazing enough apple loses everywhere except where they are located. Coincidence..? I think not.
[Galaxy S III General] Nicko80:
Im sorry, but I dont no how old are you, Im old enough to say to you that back in the 80's a guy called Bill Gates as stolen a SO from a guy called Steve Jobs, and that guy called Bill it's the reachiest guy on the planet. The only things that guived money to Apple were the Ipod, if you all no that very extensive device guived Apple millionarie it Just 2 years, a thing to hear music, and at least for 3 years Iphone, a very expensive Phone, guived more millions to Apple. A low cost Phone and a mp3 player that cost more than gold, haha, Nice. When you say Apple had great hardware computers, wow, witch one? They were all crap, and they are crapy computers, try to use a some powerfull programming software on them, it Just blocks. Apple it 's a joke.
[Galaxy S III General] radeonxt:
Apple/Samsung Jurors Admit They Finished Quickly By Ignoring Prior Art & Other Key Factors

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...key-factors.shtml?threaded=true&sp=1#comments

Jury in Apple v. Samsung Goofed, Damages Reduced -- Uh Oh. What's Wrong With this Picture? ~pj Updated 5Xs

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390

WHAT? Juror in Apple-Samsung Suit May Have Owned Patent Used by Apple

http://www.androidpit.com/what-juror-in-apple-samsung-suit-may-have-owned-patent-used-by-apple

LOL @ crapple sheeps.

:victory:
[Galaxy S III General] DeadSOL:
THAT is excellent! I'm totally on board with such things! :good:
[Galaxy S III General] thesponz:
Thaw absolute rubbish. They don't and have NEVER made the best computers. They have only in the last 2 years ever made anything like the best phones. Their TV's aren't the best. Their music equipment isn't anywhere near the best, they don't make the best washing machines or fridges.... the list goes on.

They are an average mass market manufacturer... who at this moment happen to make my phone of choice.

Don't lose sight of the fact that ANDROID is why we're all here. Unless you really are a Samsung fanboy?
[Galaxy S III General] CuBz90:
That's just your opinion. Some people might find that their products are the best. It's up to that persons' preference.
[Galaxy S III General] artnat:
Well, to be honest having a jury decide in an intellectual infringement is really weird. I'm talking from a perspective of a lawyer working within civil law instead of this weird common law system. However, I do not have any background in patent proceedings (save for registering some trademarks)

What's wrong with that?

1. US citizens as a jury and 2 companies - one Korean one American. I would say the jury is hardly objective.

2. Jury foreman having an agenda in safegurading patents.

3. People with no technical knowledge decide whether something infringes technical patents.

In civil law systems the most probable way to solve this issue would by expert witnesses (which would not to be appointed by party but chosen by the court from list of independent witnesses). And the most civilized way to solve it in any legal system would be arbitration (also with expert witnesses).

What's wrong with the patents?

First of all Samsung is right - patenting a rounded rectangle and row of colorful icons is just wrong and should never be allowed.

What's wrong with Samsung?

They imitated the iPhone! Really you would have to be blind not to see it. However the way they did it (let's make it a better design based on Apple, not ripping of Apple!) is different than copying. Most of the patents shouldn't be even valid. There is a load of companies in China copying the iPhone 1:1 (save for the OS).

What's wrong with Apple?

A company that stole half of their ideas (like graphic OS from Xerox) and apparently imitating Sony as one of the pictures submitted by Samsung shows, is first to be calling the kettle black. It's a false sense of morality.
[Galaxy S III General] Theshawty:
This caught my eye. Did they really imitate the iPhone, or are you just stuck to some fact that what the iPhone looks like decides what other smartphones shouldn't look like?

I mean, if someone makes a phone roughly the same size as a iPhone, makes it rectangular with rounded corner; of course people will say it looks like an iPhone and that whatever company which made it copied the iPhone.

No, your statement is wrong.

If I take a few pieces of wood and start sawing them to planks, then start building a small house. Have I then imitated another house which looks kinda similar or have I built my idea of a house? You understand what I'm saying? Just because something looks like another object doesn't mean one has imitated the other, Apple has no right patenting shapes.
[Galaxy S III General] CuBz90:
That's exactly what I've been trying to say :)
[Galaxy S III General] thesponz:
You're right it is all about opinion and I'm not suggesting for a second that mine is right. But ask any hi-fi expert if they'd say Samsung was at the forefront of hi-fi they'd say??? No

The same when it comes to computers. Computer experts would recommend Samsung computers???? No

TV experts would recommend Samsung as at the forefront of TV design and manufacture?? No.

Same for kitchen appliances etc etc.

Companies who specialise in each of these fields make the beat products. All Samsung do (and they do it very well) is provide mid range products for the mass consumer. A Jack of all trades if you like.

If anyone really thinks they make cutting edge products..... seriously???
[Galaxy S III General] artnat:
Did you bother to read my whole post? It doesn't look like it.

The statement is not wrong. The similarities are apparent with international Galaxy S i9000. Not so much with other models IMO. I am not sure how well you looked at the trial but there is 130 page long Samsung document that is a comparison between interfaces where half of comments say "make it more like iPhone". Not make it the same but they point out the differences in design and say that in final version it should work like in iPhone.

However there is nothing wrong in imitating or being inspired by (I could have used inspired as well - this is the same thing). You're taking what's best from other without copying 1:1, instead you are adding you stuff to it to make something new and better. I am angry because Samsung has some great designers and ideas - for example Galaxy S 3 is by no means similar to iPhone in ways of physical design (rounded edges, pebble shape, case design). And even more angry that they stick to such bad design decisions made by imitating apple, as using the Touchwiz UI. I hate it the Touchwiz e-mail clinet has everything ass-backwards compared to stock clients (look were the synch button is in gmail app and samsung stock client), I hate the sliding notification toggles (and who in the right mind would put half of those toggles in there anyways).

They are capable of working at their own and 130 page long document comapring iPhone and SGS1 with comments that Samsung should make it more like iPhone

The border between copying and imitating/ being inspired is very narrow (at least in copyrights in private law, not sure how that works with some of the patents in US law).

I am strongly against patenting of some things. Patenting rounded edges or basic ideas of functionalities are wrong, technical patents are not. By technical I mean patenting the method that the finger touches are converted by digitizer and how those touches are read that way or other, not functional that swyping two fingers doest that or that in the os.

The same goes for design - I cannot make something that has the same size, proportions or look as the other product with only a different logo (as chinese companies do) but I can make something similiar with differences (as Samsung does). To decide what to buy is a consumer's choice, not manufacturer's.

And, frankly, anybody who confuses Samsung phone and Apple iPhone (even SGS1) is just a moron and deserves no legal protection.
[Galaxy S III General] criscan:
In the last days I'm a little bit confused.

Google has developed a system whit some features that looks like IOS from Apple. This is not Samsung problem.

Pinch to zoom, scrolling, double tap and some other things are provided by Google in the Android source code.

Where's Google in this thing? They are sleeping?

Its very convenient to Apple to put Samsung in the eye of the storm.

And the lack of action of Google whitout proper protection of your partners is the worst part in this history.
[Galaxy S III General] thesponz:
Google made it clear in writing a number of tomes that Samsung should make touchwizz look LESS like IOS. Samsung chose a number of times in writing to ignore them. I think Google whether they actually wanted to make Samsung change anything or not have just been smart by putting it in writing.
[Galaxy S III General] Theshawty:
I admit I skipped a few segments of text, yes. Considering I go to school between 8.25 (most of the times) to about 15.25 (most of the times) my brain suffers from tiredness and whenever there's a big wall of text, I have no energy to read it all.

Guess I should have read everything you wrote.

It shares similarities with the iPhone, yes, but there's no right pointing out it specifically copies the iPhone. A rectangle with rounded corners will always be just that, a rectangle, a shape if you will. Apple has no right trying to patent a shape of any sort and whoever in the US decided to give them that right is a stupid person, to keep it in nice words.

What next? Sue the makers of Lego for making rectangels that might look like iPads?

A shape is a shape, right? A rounded-corner flat brick-like rectangle kinda signifies just any smartphone out there. I mean, in a world like this and the problems with it, kinda makes you surprised that one country chooses to spend a considerable amount of time with dealing with Apple's ridiculous lawsuit.

US law = Granting patents to anyone and anyhow, if they have big pockets and as long as it's a popular American company. Why else would Apple get their asses kicked outside of the US where the devices don't infringe at all? Apple is jealous.

I agree. Patenting basic functions is laughable. Isn't Apple breaking federal law trying to get a monopoly on the rectangular, rounded-corner shapes.

"Hey, everyone, most Lego parts are now banned for looking like the iPhone.

Hell, let's ban refridgerators and freezers too, they could be mistaken for iPhones.

Hmm.. Doesn't this newly-cut piece of wood resemble an iPhone in shape? Let's ban it from being used and sold.

I strongly think the base of that house is made of rectangular bricks with slightly rounded-ish corners. Let's ban the entire house from being used"

They deserve a good slap in the face and/or a kick in the family jewels.
[Galaxy S III General] criscan:
User interface (TW) and shape are just a part of the demand and probably the less important in my opinion . Pinch, double tap and scrolling are the most relevant features and Android, whitout this, wouldn't be an attractive mobile system.

In other hand, I can survive without TW Launcher and a phisical home button. Yes we can!...lol

For example, there's no TW interface in Galaxy Nexus and its also the target of Apple.

Again, my question is "where's Google in all this things".
[Galaxy S III General] thesponz:
Live without TW????? Are you crazy!!!!! :)

Imagine the day, the S3 would be awesome!!!
[Galaxy S III General] artnat:
Great we made it clear, mate. :)

Actually I am pretty tired too and made so many grammar mistakes that it pains me to read my response. I had two exams today during what you could call a 'three year bar practice' trying to get my barrister license and then had to go to work.

Anyways - I agree with the basic concept of a free shape, but not every shape is equal. Actually the shape and size of a phone is mostly a response to functionality - you have to be able to hold it in one hand and I don't see where you could put the display if not between the speaker and mike.

However, there is something like a Philippe Stark juicer. I would say though this shape is in some ways due to its function, it would be pretty obvious if somebody copied the design 1:1 and inspired.

The architectural plans are actually copyrighted too (at least here they are) so you can build only one house using one project if that's what you agreed to with the Architect. You can build a copy of a house for yourself - sure. But you cannot sell copied architectural design to others. However, you can sell imitating design. The houses will mostly look the same (some of those things are due to legal regulations disallowing you to build in other ways or using colors, so that the houses match, other are functional) but only up to some point. Certainly copying an architectural design would not be that massive and easy as copying an industrial design. There are also some architectural landmarks that are easily recognizable due to their shape. I bet you could patent the shape of a building in US, here you can't.

Back to the Apple case - the jury made their verdict too quick for such a complicated case. As far as I know the jury made a simple test, due to foreman's suggestions - they were shown an iPhone and a Samsung device from afar with lighted up screens and they would have to say if it's similiar... I mean come on... How lame and idiotic is that?

EDIT:

Oh, and Kubrick estate should sue Sony for monolithic design infringement! :D
[Galaxy S III General] jult:
Everything you just wrote is not true. You don't even seem capable of properly reading anything. Even while I did not write anything about them making the best computers, Samsung actually DID make really good computers, the ones from the early 80s still work by the way, check any Korean museum or government building for those!

Samsung became the largest producer of memory chips in the world in 1992, and is the world's second-largest chipmaker after Intel. Many parts *inside* Apple's i-crapware are MADE BY SAMSUNG.

In 1995, Samsung created its first liquid-crystal display screen. Ten years later, Samsung grew to be the world's largest manufacturer of liquid-crystal display panels. Most of the earlier Apple computers are "Samsung inside" for at least 33% of the hardware.

Oh and by the way; http://www.webpronews.com/apple-ordering-samsungs-flexible-oled-screens-for-iphone-yoga-2012-05

You can complain all you want about samsung not being what they actually are, without them you would not be sitting behind your mini-computers right now. Samsung is inside your car (if you own one), and inside your computer.

One of MY first portable sat-phones was a Samsung and it kicks every new phone's ass in durability. Still works, aside from the networks no longer being in use rendering it useless now.
[Galaxy S III General] JediNinjafication:
To which they had to pay the Chinese over the iPod and China threatened Apple with a ban because apple BOUGHT the iPod name. Or was it iPad.. ? Whatever, they all look the same. Maybe they should sue themselves because the iPad copied the iPhone! Jeez, change it up a little guys.

---------- Post added at 12:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:39 PM ----------

She's been apple since the very first one I believe. I think I'm wearing her down..she bought an Android from Craigslist to play with. She'a not gonna hook it up or anything but.. ...she did ask me about root. Then few days later asked me to explain flashing and bootloader. Any day now. ..apple will lose another one! Hmmm..maybe I should make a take to play when she's asleep lol
[Galaxy S III General] thesponz:
No you're right. But this discussion isn't about tech within tech, or is it ?? because if it is, then by the very nature of you slagging Apple off at the same time as saying that they are formed using 50% Samsung parts then who are you actually slating.

I was simply pointing out that Samsung are nowhere near the forefront of consumer tech which is what i thought we were discussing here ?
[Galaxy S III General] Aimara:
latest news , apple patents started targeting fruit stall selling apples fruit.. lol
[Galaxy S III General] mputtr:
actually, samsung TVs are the up there with Sony for high end tvs. Their laptops are mid-high in across the board, their phones are obviously top notched.. and that's just the obvious tech stuff....

not sure about the home appliances though... although i've heard pretty decent things about it
[Galaxy S III General] phunkycow:
I do. You should really take a look at their SSD's. Ask anyone who's got a clue and they'll tell you Samsung make the BEST SSD's hands down. See? They're not just an average company, they excel at something. :p