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.

I think Samsung have copied Apple a bit (although I think there's a big element of inevitability about the iPad "design") but I also think that this sort of thing should be allowed to an extent in order to allow other firms to make competing products that are obviously the right design for the purpose. Imagine if the original car firms were as big a bunch of cunty little sue-crazy fucknuts as Apple et al. We'd all have to just drive Fords or else buy cars with six wheels and no windows or something.

Aren't there a few cases where Samsung have blatantly copied icon designs from Apple? Not just recreating the general idea behind the icon, but literally pixel-copying?

I've veered off-topic in this thread (i.e. from the court case), but the point isn't about being inspired, but lifting everything wholesale.

Syncing with iTunes on a Mac or PC requires:

Mac: OS X v10.6.8 or later

Freaking hell. I was just comparing the Nexus 7 and iPad mini for potential Christmas fun times, and damn. Not only does Apple's site not want me to see the RAM apparently, but it turns out I wouldn't be able to sync it to my MacBook anyway:


Thanks, bastards! Is Leopard that shit now?

It's 5 years old

On one hand, Leopard is over five years old now. On the other hand though I'd have thought the syncing is more about the version of iTunes you're running than the OS so it's odd (i.e. shit) to tie the limitation directly to the version of OS X. Well, unless you can't run the current version of iTunes on Leopard or something?

Pretty sure I have the latest iTunes.

Are you sure? I only ask because a quick Google about compatibility threw up this very recent discussion thread which claims that you can't run the later versions of iTunes on Leopard and, as iOS6 requires iTunes 10.7, you're screwed unless you upgrade your OS.

Are you sure? I only ask because a quick Google about compatibility threw up this very recent discussion thread which claims that you can't run the later versions of iTunes on Leopard and, as iOS6 requires iTunes 10.7, you're screwed unless you upgrade your OS.

They must have thought things through better than that, no?

There is some stuff here but (all rumour) on what the new one might have

https://bgr.com/2014/08/04/ipad-air-2-ipad-6-rumors/

If you can get by with your Ipad 2 for now I would wait as they are saying there will be some button and microphone position changes as well as the usual that it will be 0.000001mm thinner that the last one

I recently got an Air and found it was much improved in performance over a 3 on reading comics and other stuff

Anyway, been looking at the current iPad Air and then reading rumours about the new one. Not sure whether to wait or not. Can somebody tell me what to do?