iPhone 5 looks like...?

[s44]

this?

Lawsuits incoming from Samsung, HTC, Motorola in 3, 2, 1...

 

[JS80]

Hah! They copied the Samsung GS2!

 

[Oyeve]

Probably true. I cant see any other type of design for the ip5 if it goes larger screeen.

 

[cheezy321]

So the iPhone 5 copied the Samsung SGS2 which copied the iPhone 4?

/head asplodes

 

[zsdersw]

Slow news day, I suspect.

 

[QuantumPion]

zoom and enhance! :awe:

 

[boomhower]

I don't get it. Of course they are going to look similar. They a large rectangles covered mostly with a screen a few buttons on the bottom.

 

[NoStateofMind]

I don't get it. Of course they are going to look similar. They a large rectangles covered mostly with a screen a few buttons on the bottom.

You just stole my idea for a new phone! I'll sue!

 

[Bateluer]

So the iPhone 5 copied the Samsung SGS2 which copied the iPhone 4 which copied the Samsung F700

/head asplodes

Fixed it.

 

[Envian]

Something interesting about iPhone... remember this is a concept...

iPhone 5 concept video

 

[cheezy321]

Fixed it.

Lol, silly fanboi. The samsung F700 was announced after the original iphone was announced. Feb 2007 to be exact, iPhone was announced Jan 2007. Basically these two phones were being developed at the same time. What happened after the iPhone came out? Here comes the damning evidence....

Wanna read more? Link: http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/20/talk-picture-samsung-f700/


Get your facts straight.

 

[Doboji]

Have you actually seen a SGSII? doesnt look anything even remotely like the iPhone 4.... Its not even close.

 

[zsdersw]

Have you actually seen a SGSII? doesnt look anything even remotely like the iPhone 4.... Its not even close.

Apparently the fact that the SGSII is bigger, has a bigger screen, and has two capacitive buttons on either side of the physical button doesn't matter if you're an Apple fanatic.

 

[Bateluer]

Lol, silly fanboi. The samsung F700 was announced after the original iphone was announced. Feb 2007 to be exact, iPhone was announced Jan 2007.

Get your facts straight.

F700 was announced at Cebit 2006, but didn't have any hardware to show. Remove the iPhone picture from your shot, observing only the F700 and SGS2. Still with me? Ok, observer how Samsung has added the standard Android buttons of Menu and Back next to their large center button, common on both the F700 and SGS2. One would expect the visuals to improve between the 2006 F700 and the 2011 SGS2, hardly noteworthy. TW may look very iPhone-like, but its a lot like saying Gnome looks like Windows.

Apparently the fact that the SGSII is bigger, has a bigger screen, and has two capacitive buttons on either side of the physical button doesn't matter if you're an Apple fanatic.

Course not. TW is very iPhone-like though, one of the big reasons people hate it. But its basically squarish pictures aligned on a grid. Like pretty much every other GUI every made by anyone ever.

 

[Doboji]

Lol, silly fanboi. The samsung F700 was announced after the original iphone was announced. Feb 2007 to be exact, iPhone was announced Jan 2007. Basically these two phones were being developed at the same time. What happened after the iPhone came out? Here comes the damning evidence....

Wanna read more? Link: http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/20/talk-picture-samsung-f700/


Get your facts straight.

Is it because they added color to the icons? Is that an Apple "thing". Apple owns the patent or trademark for brightly colored squareish icons? Help me out here... because I fail to see how the Galaxy S more closely resembles the iPhone than it does any other touchscreen smartphone on the market.

Compare the Galaxy S, iPhone 3, iPhone 4, Blackberry Storm, Nexus One, Nokia 5800, Palm Pre...

They all have similar characteristics. I fail completely to see how the Galaxy S compares closer to the iPhone 3 than it does many of the others...

The only thing questionable is the way the Touchwiz Appdrawer looks in comparison to the iPhone home screens. Would the lawsuits end if Touchwiz adopted a vertically scrolling app drawer like the standard Android? Beyond that I fail utterly to see the problem here.

Apple is clearly engaging in anti-competitive behavior with these injunctions and lawsuits. I don't know if they'll ever pay for it... or get stopped in anyway. But it's pretty awful from my perspective.

 

[akugami]

Apparently the fact that the SGSII is bigger, has a bigger screen, and has two capacitive buttons on either side of the physical button doesn't matter if you're an Apple fanatic.

The fact that Android was largely influenced (copied) by iOS doesn't seem to matter if you're an Android fanatic either.

Is it because they added color to the icons? Is that an Apple "thing". Apple owns the patent or trademark for brightly colored squareish icons? Help me out here... because I fail to see how the Galaxy S more closely resembles the iPhone than it does any other touchscreen smartphone on the market.

Many will say that the iPhone copied the Samsung F700. Ergonomically, if you compare the whole device, they are completely different. It is only when viewing just the front face is it similar. The much thicker body of the F700 as well as the slide out keyboard for instance. But if you wanna argue UI, the F700 is largely navigated by "scrolling" through icons. You can grab a copy of the user manual if you wanna see how it controls. Anyone can see that the UI is navigated completely different from the iPhone.

The only thing questionable is the way the Touchwiz Appdrawer looks in comparison to the iPhone home screens. Would the lawsuits end if Touchwiz adopted a vertically scrolling app drawer like the standard Android? Beyond that I fail utterly to see the problem here.

Likely. Keep in mind that Apple's argument vs Samsung is for Trade Dress and not any single element. As has been stated many times in these forums, multiple common elements may be combined to form a unique design. Something many people will keep ignoring. Apple's argument on some of the newer Samsung devices aren't that many, or all, of the elements are unique and original to Apple devices.

Apple's opinion is that taken as a whole, Samsung has copied the iPhone from the physical aspects of the device down to the feel of the OS. And considering how many reviewers stated how Samsung's Touchwhiz interface feels like iOS and the fact that Samsung has been previously sued by the likes of RIM for copying cell phone designs, it's hard to argue in favor of Samsung if one was to be completely unbiased.

Apple is clearly engaging in anti-competitive behavior with these injunctions and lawsuits. I don't know if they'll ever pay for it... or get stopped in anyway. But it's pretty awful from my perspective.

To a degree I agree with you. However, think on this, if you owned Apple completely and you felt your competitors were copying your design, would you sue them? It all comes down to whether one feels Apple's patents and Trade Dress arguments are valid or not. Apple clearly feels that way so they are doing something about it.

If Apple's management feels their patents or designs are being infringed upon, they are legally obligated to do something about it. ...the directors and officers of a corporation shall exercise their powers and discharge their duties with a view to the interests of the corporation and of the shareholders.... The bolded section is taken from Section 716 of Main's Business Corporation Act but every state will have some similar statue. The wording may differ but in essence, the management of every company is legally obligated to do everything in management's power to look out for the interest of its shareholders. There is nothing stated about the public's best interest. So if Apple's management feels their IP and Trademarks are being infringed upon, they have a legal obligation to do something about it.

Keep in mind I am not arguing that Apple's IP and Trademarks are being infringed upon is correct. I am merely stating why Apple may be legally obligated to take legal action against Samsung, HTC, and anyone else if they feel their Trademarks and IP are being infringed.

 

[Doboji]

The fact that Android was largely influenced (copied) by iOS doesn't seem to matter if you're an Android fanatic either.



Many will say that the iPhone copied the Samsung F700. Ergonomically, if you compare the whole device, they are completely different. It is only when viewing just the front face is it similar. The much thicker body of the F700 as well as the slide out keyboard for instance. But if you wanna argue UI, the F700 is largely navigated by "scrolling" through icons. You can grab a copy of the user manual if you wanna see how it controls. Anyone can see that the UI is navigated completely different from the iPhone.

Likely. Keep in mind that Apple's argument vs Samsung is for Trade Dress and not any single element. As has been stated many times in these forums, multiple common elements may be combined to form a unique design. Something many people will keep ignoring. Apple's argument on some of the newer Samsung devices aren't that many, or all, of the elements are unique and original to Apple devices.

Apple's opinion is that taken as a whole, Samsung has copied the iPhone from the physical aspects of the device down to the feel of the OS. And considering how many reviewers stated how Samsung's Touchwhiz interface feels like iOS and the fact that Samsung has been previously sued by the likes of RIM for copying cell phone designs, it's hard to argue in favor of Samsung if one was to be completely unbiased.

To a degree I agree with you. However, think on this, if you owned Apple completely and you felt your competitors were copying your design, would you sue them? It all comes down to whether one feels Apple's patents and Trade Dress arguments are valid or not. Apple clearly feels that way so they are doing something about it.

If Apple's management feels their patents or designs are being infringed upon, they are legally obligated to do something about it. ...the directors and officers of a corporation shall exercise their powers and discharge their duties with a view to the interests of the corporation and of the shareholders.... The bolded section is taken from Section 716 of Main's Business Corporation Act but every state will have some similar statue. The wording may differ but in essence, the management of every company is legally obligated to do everything in management's power to look out for the interest of its shareholders. There is nothing stated about the public's best interest. So if Apple's management feels their IP and Trademarks are being infringed upon, they have a legal obligation to do something about it.

Keep in mind I am not arguing that Apple's IP and Trademarks are being infringed upon is correct. I am merely stating why Apple may be legally obligated to take legal action against Samsung, HTC, and anyone else if they feel their Trademarks and IP are being infringed.

I absolutely understand Apples perspective, if you have the cash, and the legal system allows for you to litigate continuously against your competitors with things like this "trade dress". I am simply dismayed and angered that this is allowed to continue as it is.

Trade dress as you describe it is completely subjective on every level... It is beyond me to understand why our legal system allows for it.

For example why aren't there lawsuits all the time in the auto industry? The same sort of thing happens all the time... Doesn't the Ford Fusion copy the trade dress of the Camry and Accord? What about the F150 and it's competitors?

And sorry even though I understand Apple from a corporate perspective... I will forever hate them for taking advantage of the system. I think Apple arrogance has them believing they own the "trade dress" for the touchscreen smartphone as it exists today period.

 

[theeedude]

2006

2009
And Apple is calling Samsung the "copyist" I guess they are living up to Steve Jobs' "ethics" of stealing instead of copying.

 

[runawayprisoner]

I am not sure if it's just me, but doesn't "steal" essentially means stripping one of his own possession without his consent?

In that regard, Apple has only managed to "copy", not steal.

 

[theeedude]

I am not sure if it's just me, but doesn't "steal" essentially means stripping one of his own possession without his consent?

In that regard, Apple has only managed to "copy", not steal.

No, it managed to steal. Meaning not only did it make a copy of Samsung's design, but it wants to strip Samsung of the ability to use it and claim it as solely Apple's. That's what Jobs meant by good artists copy, great artist steal. Great artists, as he sees himself, get away with not just copying a design, but stealing credit for it and claiming it as their own.

 

[Fire&Blood]

The iphone precedes the F700, one of the sites had an actual hands on impression article but Samsung asked them to take it down because the prototype of the F700 (which according to Samsung was in development since April 06) performed poorly. The actual hands on article (think there was a video too) was post iphone release.

Apple pushed this patent litigation business too far, arguments about protecting IP are BS, the lawsuits are a poor attempt to fight off competition.

What if one of the early PDA OEM's had patented the accelerometer function of switching landscape/portrait modes or other functions? All OEM's, including Apple and of course us consumers would have suffered.

Apple cherry picked features of various PDA's and once tech innovations and material pricing made it viable to produce a phone with high profit margins, they launched the iphone and then turned around and tried to restrict others from using features they stole to begin with.

Kick the competition out under the disguise of trade dress protection...

 

[zsdersw]

The fact that Android was largely influenced (copied) by iOS doesn't seem to matter if you're an Android fanatic either.

The fact that all these lawsuits and injunctions are recent, rather than when Android first came out, makes your statement irrelevant to this discussion.

 

[Doboji]

In any case... Apples shenanigans is very much like all the crazy lawsuits about spilled coffee and burglars falling through sky lights. Legally they can do it, financially the stand to gain from it... But it makes them total deadbeat douche bags.

 

[akugami]

The fact that all these lawsuits and injunctions are recent, rather than when Android first came out, makes your statement irrelevant to this discussion.

So my statement is irrelevant because you decide it was? It's ok for you to constantly shit on Apple and Apple users in every thread for certain behavior but when similar behavior is pointed out and attributed to Android, it's OEM's, and it's fanboys suddenly it's irrelevant?

 

[zsdersw]

So my statement is irrelevant because you decide it was? It's ok for you to constantly shit on Apple and Apple users in every thread for certain behavior but when similar behavior is pointed out and attributed to Android, it's OEM's, and it's fanboys suddenly it's irrelevant?

Not because I said so.. because of common sense. Assuming you're correct about Android being built on ideas put forth by iOS, essentially copying iOS, that would only be relevant to this discussion about another of Apple's current legal escapades if it was 2008 (when Android was first released)... not 2011.

Android has been around, in all of its iOS-copying (according to you) glory, for a few years without all of these lawsuits. To bring up that purported copying now, in a discussion about Apple's present legal efforts to kill Android is outdated.