• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Apple's photoshop of the Galaxy Tab to be 4:3

This doesn't at all change the fact that Samsung infringed on Apples patents with the Galaxy tab. The aspect ratio isn't even relevant at all, even if Apple used that in their claim that the tab was infringing. Its about function, user interface, and technical specs, if the actual physical dimensions are different that doesn't automatically give samsung a get out of jail free card. The injunction should remain in place
 
GTSRguy said:
This doesn't at all change the fact that Samsung infringed on Apples patents with the Galaxy tab. The aspect ratio isn't even relevant at all, even if Apple used that in their claim that the tab was infringing. Its about function, user interface, and technical specs, if the actual physical dimensions are different that doesn't automatically give samsung a get out of jail free card. The injunction should remain in place
Click to expand...

And here come the uninformed fanboi's.
 
GTSRguy said:
This doesn't at all change the fact that Samsung infringed on Apples patents with the Galaxy tab. The aspect ratio isn't even relevant at all, even if Apple used that in their claim that the tab was infringing. Its about function, user interface, and technical specs, if the actual physical dimensions are different that doesn't automatically give samsung a get out of jail free card. The injunction should remain in place
Click to expand...

What crack are you smoking?

Function: Yes it's a tablet. Did Apple invent the tablet? Should iPad2 be the only legal tablet?

User Interface: If you think the iOS interface and the Honeycomb interface are the same... you're smoking crack.

Technical Specs: What are you talking about? The technical specs are right inline with all the other Tegra 2 platforms out... starting with the Xoom which came out before the current iteration of the iPad.

In recent weeks I've been coming around to the idea that Samsung is indeed copying quite a bit from Apple... but it's things like icon designs, product packaging, some of the elements of TouchWiz etc... but Form/Function/User interface... no way.
 
Oops, indeed...

"Well, your honor, the aspect ratio of the computer we used to put together the pleading was off...."

Will be interesting to see this one play out...
 
runawayprisoner said:
Interesting how only that one picture was pointed out while the other 3 in the same series weren't. (Hint: it's the only one with wrong aspect ratio, but only because the iPad 2 next to it is also "shopped" and the reason is quite obvious: Apple is too lazy to capture a photo of the interface running on the actual devices)

TechCrunch has the whole filing:
http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/15/ap...unction-was-seriously-misleading-as-in-false/
Click to expand...

It's the most illustrative of the pictures. And clearly intentional.
 
Well someones going to get sacked.

If Apple loses this case dont they have to compensate Samsung for the loss of sales when the tablet were barred?
 
The rest of the side by photos are horrible as well. While not photoshopped, highly suspect. They shot the iPad from an angle, where it has a forced perspective, making it have a slimming effect. (this depends on how your eye follows it). My first thought was, they doctored the photos to make the iPad look narrower than 4:3. But quickly realizing that the lawyers are incompetent. They couldn't get a product or filing photo from their own client.
And in this type if injuction where it's only based on illustrations, that us serious business. An Ex Parte hearing at that.
 
GTSRguy said:
This doesn't at all change the fact that Samsung infringed on Apples patents with the Galaxy tab. The aspect ratio isn't even relevant at all, even if Apple used that in their claim that the tab was infringing. Its about function, user interface, and technical specs, if the actual physical dimensions are different that doesn't automatically give samsung a get out of jail free card. The injunction should remain in place
Click to expand...

Yes, only Apple should be allowed to make ARM tablets. 🙄

Since Doboji already smacked you, I won't bother. 🙂
 
foghorn67 said:
It's the most illustrative of the pictures. And clearly intentional.
Click to expand...

Well, whichever the intention, it is obvious that the iPad 2 next to it is also a render.

Apple can still say that it's the wrong aspect ratio because it's an early render and all they'll have to do is re-submit an adjusted filing.

If I'm right, Apple only has to prove that there are similarities, even by accident, for Samsung to lose the case. They are alleging that Samsung copied the idea, not that Samsung stole the design outright.
 
Would probably be a lot more damning if the other pictures were also off, but as far as I can tell it's only that one. If you actually look at the complaint there are plenty of other side-by-side pictures where you can clearly tell that the aspect ratio is different. The text below the display doesn't say anything about the aspect ratio of the screen either.

Could be some legal trickery; could be an oversight or an idiot with Photoshop. Either way, I doubt that the entire case hinges on a single image.
 
Mopetar said:
Would probably be a lot more damning if the other pictures were also off, but as far as I can tell it's only that one. If you actually look at the complaint there are plenty of other side-by-side pictures where you can clearly tell that the aspect ratio is different. The text below the display doesn't say anything about the aspect ratio of the screen either.

Could be some legal trickery; could be an oversight or an idiot with Photoshop. Either way, I doubt that the entire case hinges on a single image.
Click to expand...

I dunno, thats the only straight on, side by side photo. All the others are at funky angle where you cant see the sizes properly.
 
You'd expect judges to be able to judge better than on... a single image though.

That aside, that's not the only clear picture of the front side without an angle. There were some others.

Edit: try pages 21, 23, and 39. Those show very clearly that the aspect ratio is different.
 
Last edited:
If the EU injunction is not upheld, Apple is liable for damages to Samsung, lost profits, etc, from having it put in place in the first place. Will be interesting to watch.
 
runawayprisoner said:
Well, whichever the intention, it is obvious that the iPad 2 next to it is also a render.

Apple can still say that it's the wrong aspect ratio because it's an early render and all they'll have to do is re-submit an adjusted filing.

If I'm right, Apple only has to prove that there are similarities, even by accident, for Samsung to lose the case. They are alleging that Samsung copied the idea, not that Samsung stole the design outright.
Click to expand...

Actually, Apple has a patent on a specific design, that is what the injunction is in place over. The actual design patent, not some idea patent. Apple can resubmit, but if after reviewing the new submission, the judge decides that the design is different from what Apple has patented, it can throw the injunction out and force Apple to pay damages to Samsung for delaying the launch.
 
WelshBloke said:
I dunno, thats the only straight on, side by side photo. All the others are at funky angle where you cant see the sizes properly.
Click to expand...

Most of the text below the image talks about rounded corners, the frame, position of the display, the icons on the display, etc. Besides, from the photos on the previous page, the front view makes it pretty obvious that the Galaxy Tab is longer and has a different aspect ratio.
 
senseamp said:
Actually, Apple has a patent on a specific design, that is what the injunction is in place over. The actual design patent, not some idea patent. Apple can resubmit, but if after reviewing the new submission, the judge decides that the design is different from what Apple has patented, it can throw the injunction out and force Apple to pay damages to Samsung for delaying the launch.
Click to expand...

The actual design of the device itself seems to be under trade dress infringement rather than patent infringement unless Apple was somehow able to patent the design of pretty much any laptop computer device without a keyboard... if you know what I mean.

Trade dress infringement means Apple only has to show that the iPad's design is distinctive, or that anything with an aluminum back and a black (or white) screen in front is recognized as an iPad, and that it is possible for a Galaxy Tab 10.1 to be mistaken as an iPad.

It's actually pretty ridiculous in my opinions, though it seems like Apple still has a case regardless of that aspect ratio misdirection.
 
Its an uphill battle for Apple, EU would love to fuck Apple in the ass unless they grease their hands.
 
runawayprisoner said:
The actual design of the device itself seems to be under trade dress infringement rather than patent infringement unless Apple was somehow able to patent the design of pretty much any laptop computer device without a keyboard... if you know what I mean.

Trade dress infringement means Apple only has to show that the iPad's design is distinctive, or that anything with an aluminum back and a black (or white) screen in front is recognized as an iPad, and that it is possible for a Galaxy Tab 10.1 to be mistaken as an iPad.

It's actually pretty ridiculous in my opinions, though it seems like Apple still has a case regardless of that aspect ratio misdirection.
Click to expand...

Right, but if apple had to fudge the photo to make G.Tab look like an iPad, it's an admission that it doesn't look like one in reality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top