Be Excellent To Each Other

I can tell you know nothing about sine waves.

Apparently they are bipolar, which is a shame for them.

Galaxy On Fire 2 HD is ace

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/jul/19/apple-ordered-advertisements-samsung-did-not-copy-ipad?cat=technology&type=article

I'm hoping that will stop them playing silly buggers with patents, but I know it won't.

Lol, that's excellent. As you say it totally won't make any difference but it's still nice to see a judge at least try and demonstrate how ridiculous it's all become.

Ooh, that looks nice. Got a link to a big version?

2010/11/12 is in the URL.

I didn't say it was recent, just that they're all as bad as each other.

I'm against the patents mess, but this judgment seems wrong. Unless I'm mistaken, Samsung sued Apple in the UK, and the result of "iPads are too cool to be mistaken" is just utter bullshit.

This case illustrates the importance of properly taking into account the informed user's knowledge and experience of the design corpus. When I first saw the Samsung products in this case I was struck by how similar they look to the Apple design when they are resting on a table. They look similar because they both have the same front screen. It stands out. However to the informed user (which at that stage I was not) these screens do not stand out to anything like the same extent. The front view of the Apple design takes its place amongst its kindred prior art. There is a clear family resemblance between the front of the Apple design and other members of that family (Flatron, Bloomberg 1 and 2, Ozolins, Showbox, Wacom). They are not identical to each other but they form a family. There are differences all over these products but the biggest differences between these various family members are at the back and sides. The user who is particularly observant and is informed about the design corpus reacts to the Apple design by recognising the front view as one of a familiar type. From the front both the Apple design and the Samsung tablets look like members of the same, pre-existing family. As a result, the significance of that similarity overall is much reduced and the informed user's attention to the differences at the back and sides will be enhanced considerably.

The informed user's overall impression of each of the Samsung Galaxy Tablets is the following. From the front they belong to the family which includes the Apple design; but the Samsung products are very thin, almost insubstantial members of that family with unusual details on the back. They do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool. The overall impression produced is different.

i) He (or she) is a user of the product in which the design is intended to be incorporated, not a designer, technical expert, manufacturer or seller (PepsiCo paragraph 54 referring to Grupo Promer paragraph 62; Shenzen paragraph 46).

ii) However, unlike the average consumer of trade mark law, he is particularly observant (PepsiCo paragraph 53);

iii) He has knowledge of the design corpus and of the design features normally included in the designs existing in the sector concerned (PepsiCo paragraph 59 and also paragraph 54 referring to Grupo Promer paragraph 62);

iv) He is interested in the products concerned and shows a relatively high degree of attention when he uses them (PepsiCo paragraph 59);

v) He conducts a direct comparison of the designs in issue unless there are specific circumstances or the devices have certain characteristics which make it impractical or uncommon to do so (PepsiCo paragraph 55).

They're both tablets, and they look and act like tablets.

Quelle surprise.

They're both tablets, and they look and act like tablets.
Quelle surprise.

Mr Sherman explained that the idea of tablet computers has existed for a long time, and pointed out they had been imagined in science fiction, referring to Star Trek (from 1966 onwards) and 2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick, 1968). Item 2 in Schedule A is a display device from 2001: A Space Odyssey. Mr Sherman's view was that optimal design principles for tablet computers had been commonly understood for a long time and by 2004 it was understood that any tablet computer should offer unfettered views of electronic media by means of a large display screen and that the screen would be the main element in the design of any tablet. I accept that evidence.

I find that hard to swallow.

Wheels out

Wheels out

Selective memory is selective:

Wheels out

HOLY FUCK! I HAVE JUST REALISED THAT MY OLD CRT MONITORS ALL LOOKED SIMILAR & WHEN I BOUGHT LCD ONES THEY ALL LOOKED SIMILAR TOO.

@MaliA: Samsung also ripped the interface, the packaging, and even, in some cases, the chargers—it's so brazen.

Apple submitted that the similarities between the design and the Samsung tablets could be divided into the following seven features:

i) A rectangular, biaxially symmetrical slab with four evenly, slightly rounded corners;

ii) A flat transparent surface without any ornamentation covering the entire front face of the device up to the rim;

iii) A very thin rim of constant width, surrounding and flush with the front transparent surface;

iv) A rectangular display screen surrounded by a plain border of generally constant width centred beneath the transparent surface;

v) A substantially flat rear surface which curves upwards at the sides and comes to meet the front surface at a crisp outer edge;

vi) A thin profile, the impression of which is emphasised by (v) above;

vii) Overall, a design of extreme simplicity without features which specify orientation.

Samsung pointed to differences between the lists of features relied on by Apple in the various parallel proceedings. I did not find analysing these differences to be a profitable exercise.

*awaits selection of pre-iPad tablets that look like iPads/pre-iPhone phones that look like phones*
.

Three not enough for some reason?

... the packaging wasn't exactly the bloody same. Also, the chargers weren't exactly the bloody same...

*awaits selection of pre-iPad tablets that look like iPads/pre-iPhone phones that look like phones*

Anyway, the point with Samsung isn't so much that it borrowed bits of Apple's design, but that it's attempted to clone things wholesale. If that's really how we think large businesses should run, then bleh.

Picture didn't appear.

Three not enough for some reason?

Three not enough for some reason? Want some more? http://i.imgur.com/NbDRW.jpg

Similar ≠ the same. [...] the chargers weren't exactly the bloody same.

I dunno, monitors have always came in boxes & used kettle leads. Sounds pretty fucking samey to me.

@Bamba: For the record, that's not *my* graphic. It's been around the web for ages now.

As for the iPhone…

Except for this:



and countless other old smart phones, of course.

I had one of them, and I loved it. Handwriting recognition!

This list sums up the kind of thing I'm talking about.