In addition to this, is also to note that future hardware design is pretty easily predictable: eventually frame will competently being hidden in order to have full flat surface screen (while border will still rounded).
In theory I could even patent a ****** tablet device with those specs (a barley working prototype of tablet with no frame)... it's no matter if it would work decently since the only propouse is to use its to patent troll every other company in future.
Which would find them forced to add stupid frames around their devices only to avoid me having them to patent troll them.
No, but they all do anyway.
You're being pretty stubborn about this. I'm the OP who started all of this, and I never said I can't tell the difference. I can tell the difference because I know that most Android tablets have a wider format in landscape mode than the iPad does. But if I was unfamiliar with that fact and I saw them both at different times, it would be easy to get them confused if they weren't turned on.
I don't know why you are so unwilling to admit that the Galaxy Tab looks a lot like the black iPad. Are you a part of the design team, or something? Yes, there are some minor differences, but you're deluded if you really can't see the major similarities because of the minor differences. The truth is that the black Galaxy Tab looks more like the black iPad than any other Android device. There's not a whole lot you could do to make it look more like an iPad from the front.
Does that mean that they should be banned and shut down? Not in my opinion. For years, the LTD catalog has sold a blatant iPod Touch knock-off, and nobody ever said a thing about that. Your fierce arguments against the Galaxy Tab looking like the iPad almost make it seem like you believe that a product that looks like the iPad should be banned.
Today you are You, that is truer than true. There is no one alive who is Youer than You. - Dr. Seuss
Some things just look the way they do because it is functional for it to be that way. Like the Michelins on my Volvo are round and black and have tread just like the Coopers on my wife's Volvo.
Though I think the lawsuit is stupid, and some companies do exactly what you are describing, this is clearly not what Apple is doing. They make excellent products with industry-leading design. There is little argument that the iPad is a best-in-class device.
I don't want this to be confused with fanboidom. It is very likely that I will never buy another Apple product on ideological grounds, but it is still obvious that they design superiour producs to anyone else on the market.
And it will only cost you your soul.
But I do understand it. I just don't care if I use it correctly.
Not sure why you're fixated on this word. The point is Apple sues for their bottom line.
You're just paraphrasing me now.Actually a single dimension would be length. 2+ dimensions can be shapes.
As for 'can be', it always is except in the unlikely cases where all ratios stay identical.
Great to have you telling us the real meaning behind judges' statements.Considering that the injunction was requested based on Apple's claims of Samsung "slavishly copying" Apple I would say it was implied indirectly.
No problem, just as soon as you provide the link where a court calls the Tab a smaller facsimile of the iPad.I don't remember that a court saying that size is relevant in this case. Perhaps you could provide a link so I could read it?
So what. Subjective claims about arguments given are worthless.Except this whole debate is about a subjective claim, design.
You're still doing it. 'Design' has no clear meaning here. 'Brand' is still undefined. etc...The problem is that sometimes it is very hard to put in exact words something without writing whole books. Perhaps you will find this video more to the point.
Design is usually a core part of the brand. The best example I can give you is the legendary Coca-Cola bottle which Coca-Cola heavily incorporated in their brand.
Of course we disagree. I find your opinion far too permissive.Sorry I missed that. We will just have to disagree because I find your opinion too narrow in this part.
'Predominantly' is your opinion. 'Not important' is your opinion.It's like every single thing I said about that went over your head. Of course shape (in this case predominately being aspect ratio of the Tab) could matter but it is not an important part in this case.
I suspect if the Tab *was* the same shape as the iPad Samsung's legal position now would be considerably worse than it is, so I'm guessing shape is extremely important.
By 'design' do you perhaps mean 'appearance"/"size+shape+colour'? 'Design' would cover absolutely everything.Part of their philosophy is design and ease of use. Of course this is down to each person's opinion but most Apple users appreciate that. There is a reason for Apple's recent success. I suggest you look into it.
You're still doing it
- using words like philosophy and message to describe a couple of basic things that would make the top 5 bullet points by any student of Product Design 101.
I have no problem with people seeing deeper meaning where there isn't any, I just think it's interesting that Apple is able to induce this.
If you're not a fanboy, what's supposed to say instead an Apple fanboy on Apple desing?
Apple is no better than many hardware/software (and both combined) company.
Apple has advantage towards other thanks to wider (free) media coverage.
It's like facebook: people don't go on facebook for superior quality of the product or reliability (privacy and security concern ), people go on facebook because everyone else is doing it.
to avoid derail of the thread: it is not true that apple first come tablet market with minimalist design... but it's true that a lot of people that buy things only for fashion did ear about apple on this first.
Apple was far from being the first to come out with a tablet, but they were the first to do it right. Up until the iPad, we had a bunch of tablets with resistive screens running modified versions of regular desktop OSs. That's why nobody bought them until the iPad came out.
Today you are You, that is truer than true. There is no one alive who is Youer than You. - Dr. Seuss
Actually, I dare to say that the reason why was because the other companies lacked the technology of having a screen that large to be so good. The iPhone totally changed the playing field and worked (still does) as the product to which you want to surpass in usability. I think when HTC Hero came out the touch advantage was lost and from that point on it was only a matter of time before that technology was adopted to other products.
Same goes for Samsung. I mean Samsung's had touch phones way before iPhone was released but it wasn't as good as it got until the Wave / Galaxy series. And for them, from that point on it was just a matter of implementing it into the rest of their products.
I think the only manufacturer still lagging behind is probably Nokia, who completely burned themselves twice, first by losing the opportunity to produce the iPhone, and then when they kept insisting on their bad resistive screens on their symbian devices.
They say the pen is mightier than the sword...but Steven Seagal is mightier than the Pen AND the Sword. http://tinyurl.com/ybnsx2w
Don't have Dropbox or any cloud-hosting yet? Click this -->http://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTE1MDE3NzY5
Yes they are better at design than many other software and hardware companies. There hasn't been a single platform they've touched where they haven't set the standard for design both in hardware and software.
There are some aspects of kernel design, such as memory management, where they lag behind Linux. They continually push the boundries in terms of hardware design, both in looks and concepts. Their UIs are consistently the most coherent available. I personally prefer some of the UI shells available on Linux, such as Gnome Shell, Unity, and Scrotwm, but neither Windows nor any Linux DE provides as useful or as tightly integrated of a user toolset as OSX.
However, I'm not going to do the neccesary googling to back up these claims, so you may lable me as "an Apple fanboy of Apple desing"[sic.] if you wish.
Luckily, unlike you, industry leaders in proprietary software, FOSS, and hardware design do realize that Apple sets a bar to which others would be wise to aspire, and their best ideas are usually quickly copied.
I'm not saying that Apple is the greatest source of innovation in the industry or we should do everything like them (they are not, and we should not), but they are masters of implementation. Only a fool refuses to acknowledge excellence among his rivals.
Bookmarks