Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner

1 - 20 of 51 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Anyone see this? Document released from the ongoing Apple vs Samsung court case. :yikes: :eek:

The huge internal Samsung document from 2010 shows 126 different aspects to their Galaxy S smartphone that were considered areas that needed improvement.

For every instance, it's compared meticulously to the iPhone. In almost every case, it recommends that the feature should behave more like the iPhone. :lmao:


If this isn't an example of blatant copying of Apple, I don't know what it. It's not like they are coming up with their own suggestions, it's trying to make their product better by literally going over feature by feature and copying ideas from Apple's innovation.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,384 Posts
I dont think there is any smoking guns till we hear both sides. It always sounds damning from these high priced lawyers, until you hear what the other high priced lawyer has to say.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I dont think there is any smoking guns till we hear both sides. It always sounds damning from these high priced lawyers, until you hear what the other high priced lawyer has to say.
I haven't heard anything the lawyers have said, just read the document for myself. The fact it's an internal Samsung document is not disputed. It goes line by line, feature by feature pointing out how Apple's innovation is better and how they need to do it like Apple.

In most cases, I can't believe how hideous Samsung's interface is. It's just like their stupid ads that are playing right now that try to be all like Apple's iPad ads, or the even more ridiculous ad with David Beckham.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,060 Posts
The continually updating iCal icon is one of the ways in which OS X benefitted from iOS features moving to the desktop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,500 Posts
Wasn't the feature implemented in Leopard, before the iPhone OS?

Mr. Mayor, I fail to see how this topic is Mac related. ;)

How many of these "ideas" were implemented? Did this memo ever reach Google?
 

·
peek-a-boo
Joined
·
16,428 Posts
well it's pretty obvious samsung has blatantly copied apple, but they wouldn't be the first company to copy another's OS/features etc. *cough*.

It's really a question of whether they stepped over the line on a patent.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,314 Posts
Anyone see this? Document released from the ongoing Apple vs Samsung court case. :yikes: :eek:

The huge internal Samsung document from 2010 shows 126 different aspects to their Galaxy S smartphone that were considered areas that needed improvement.

For every instance, it's compared meticulously to the iPhone. In almost every case, it recommends that the feature should behave more like the iPhone. :lmao:


If this isn't an example of blatant copying of Apple, I don't know what it. It's not like they are coming up with their own suggestions, it's trying to make their product better by literally going over feature by feature and copying ideas from Apple's innovation.
What's particularly telling is that the iPhone is the ONLY phone they are comparing their prototype to. They could be drawing inspiration from ALL of the leading smartphones on the market if they wanted to, but it appears there was only one focus for these "improvements."
 

·
Apple Certified
Joined
·
2,726 Posts
Wasn't the feature implemented in Leopard, before the iPhone OS?
No, I think Tiger did this (it's been a while) but required you to open iCal first, although there was an app or script to automate it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
376 Posts
No, I think Tiger did this (it's been a while) but required you to open iCal first, although there was an app or script to automate it.
You're right, Tiger did do it. In fact, I think it was there right at the beginning, since iCal's introduction. The idea of an updating Dock icon certainly was there long before the iPhone, even if the mechanism to do it while the app wasn't running wasn't in place yet.
 

·
peek-a-boo
Joined
·
16,428 Posts
What's particularly telling is that the iPhone is the ONLY phone they are comparing their prototype to. They could be drawing inspiration from ALL of the leading smartphones on the market if they wanted to, but it appears there was only one focus for these "improvements."
Isn't the iphone the bar to compare to?

What else, the blackberry?
;)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,314 Posts
Isn't the iphone the bar to compare to?

What else, the blackberry?
;)
Exactly. This is why, though Apple appears to act like a spoilt child at times, Steve Jobs may once again be proven right on the money. This document (now available in PDF form, HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - FOR ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY) must have given Apple attorneys great confidence walking into these proceedings. It's not just that a few patents have been violated, but rather proof that the whole product from end to end has indeed been slavishly copied.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,103 Posts
....but rather proof that the whole product from end to end has indeed been slavishly copied.
Well, the products don't rally look the same where one could mistake the Samsung phone for an iphone.

All of the issues in the very first link in Mayor's post that I looked at are obvious design issues that shouldn't have been there in the first place, iphone or no iphone.

Isn't the issue if Apple has a valid patent that Samsung has specifically violated in their design?
That the buttons on the keypad need to be legible doesn't require a comparison with the iphone, neither does the fact that the phone should switch to landscape mode if turned in either direction or that windows shouldn't overlap or, or, or.

Sounds to me more that the comparison with iphone was used to emphasize the point - I don't know who calls the shots at Samsung when it comes to functionality and user interface, in out company the Product Manager does, not the design people and if Samsung does have a Product Manager, he or she sure didn't do their job.

But I run into user issues with Apple as well where it seems nobody has even looked at how a feature works, much less tested it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,515 Posts
I'm sure not going to get involved with any Apple/Samsung patent "infringement(s)" that's presently before the US Judge and their court, and maybe he and the US court should just follow the European Germany judge's call and ruling who just told them to basically go play and fight out their differences in their own sandboxes and don't bother disturbing their courtrooms again.

And reading some of the Apple layers notes that they, Samsung, infringed on Apple's patent of having a "small rectangular display device with rounded corners" is just a bit sick and pretty feeble IMHO, and I really question as to how they even got such a patent and other similar rather pathetic patents approved in the first place.

But what I do know and have witnessed, son and his wife both avid Apple Mac users with their MBPros and iPhone etc. just recently purchased a new Samsung Galaxy with a super deal for intended cheap use with Bell in Vancouver where they're moving to in a week or so for three years, and all from what I saw and son showed me can I say the Samsung Galaxy is very impressive, and can do more than their Bell iPhone can.

Son and I both agreed that Apple really needs to pull up their socks for any proper user use with their iPhone in comparison and maybe just get out of the US courtroom and patent BS and spend the saved money or proper R&D.

But history shows that BIG companies with excess money and big lawyers and their associated excessive fees just don't do so - until the countries' judge tells them to poke their differences up their pipe and go fight it out in the children's sandbox!!

And personally, that's where they should go!! And the Adult's sandbox should be left for real adult legitimate stuff and no US courtroom should be abused by such childish behaviour from Apple nor anyone.

End of my judge's type sermon. ;)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,314 Posts
Boy. You entirely missed the point of the highly confidential document. It literally proves that the only design innovations at Samsung came from Apple's designs, not their own. It's not about patenting a "rectangle with rounded corners". It's about stealing every design innovation from another company. What new exactly has Samsung brought to the smartphone design table? There's imitation and then there's outright piracy.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,515 Posts
Yawn.... nope, I didn't miss any point of any, excuse me, cough, "highly confidential document" info nor any other such Apple "patent infringement" BS, just as the high German court judge didn't miss any point previously with some presented "evidence" when he finally told both Apple and Samsung to basically grow up and don't ever bother wasting any more court time.

Or do you think he missed the point as well??? Hmmm....???
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,314 Posts
Yawn.... nope, I didn't miss any point of any, excuse me, cough, "highly confidential document" info nor any other such Apple "patent infringement" BS, just as the high German court judge didn't miss any point previously with some presented "evidence" when he finally told both Apple and Samsung to basically grow up and don't ever bother wasting any more court time.

Or do you think he missed the point as well??? Hmmm....???
Ya, you did miss the point. That document was not entered into evidence at the German court, and the German case was decided by a judge, not a jury, on different patent issues. You really should take a look at the document, since it's (yawn) pretty clear you haven't actually read any part of it save for the one page that ehMax provided. The charge of Samsung "slavishly" copying the iPhone detail for detail is pretty hard to refute. Why do you think Samsung's lawyers fought so hard not to have this document admitted as evidence?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,103 Posts
The charge of Samsung "slavishly" copying the iPhone detail for detail is pretty hard to refute.
Not if the basis is that document.

The software verification group at Samsung were simply required to compare the S1 functionality and operation to the iPhone and that's what they did.
The iPhone isn't always better, it's just different.

One of the key questions in my mind is how many of these suggestions were actually implemented and which of those were somewhat unique.
I have gone through the first 60 in the list and for most of them no comparison to the iPhone is necessary to see that the Samsung phone needed more work.
A ton of the issues pointed out are pure design faults that shouldn't have been there in the first place, others one can argue about - do I really need to see all the digits dialed if the number is very long?
No - not really
Telephone sets have a limit how many digits they can display.
And the maximum number a telephone number can have is 20 digits including international access codes and country codes - any digits after that are control digits of some sort which are really meaningless to display or store for re-dialing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,314 Posts
Not if the basis is that document.

The software verification group at Samsung were simply required to compare the S1 functionality and operation to the iPhone and that's what they did.
The iPhone isn't always better, it's just different.

One of the key questions in my mind is how many of these suggestions were actually implemented and which of those were somewhat unique.
I have gone through the first 60 in the list and for most of them no comparison to the iPhone is necessary to see that the Samsung phone needed more work.
A ton of the issues pointed out are pure design faults that shouldn't have been there in the first place, others one can argue about - do I really need to see all the digits dialed if the number is very long?
No - not really
Telephone sets have a limit how many digits they can display.
And the maximum number a telephone number can have is 20 digits including international access codes and country codes - any digits after that are control digits of some sort which are really meaningless to display or store for re-dialing.
Fair enough; these are design elements that anyone with common sense could figure out. However, if common sense were really common, everyone would have it. The fact that the S1 is being compared ONLY to the iPhone is what makes it hard for Samsung to refute the claim that they were copying the iPhone design-wise. If Samsung were looking for other sources for its inspiration, it would not have used the iPhone as its sole basis of comparison in coming up with recommendations for how to make the S1 better. I imagine a jury would have a hard time digesting the necessity of this one-track source of inspiration as well if Samsung's designers were NOT intent on copying the iPhone.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,103 Posts
The fact that the S1 is being compared ONLY to the iPhone is what makes it hard for Samsung to refute the claim that they were copying the iPhone design-wise. If Samsung were looking for other sources for its inspiration, it would not have used the iPhone as its sole basis of comparison in coming up with recommendations for how to make the S1 better.
How do you know that the S1 was compared ONLY to the iPhone?
This is only one document.
The mandate of the verification group for that activity was obviously to compare the S1 to the iPhone and that's what they did.
There may be other similar documents comparing the S1 to other phones.

You may be thinking of comparisons that magazines and websites publish where they compare a number of similar products side-by-side. But that's not how companies work internally, they compare their product to the competition one-by-one.
My company does and it's not Samsung :D
But I must say in our comparison, our product doesn't have nearly as many design deficiencies than what I read here. Really....the very first item - with landscape that only gets activated if the phone is rotated one way but not the other way? And that only happens in memo and calculator. That to me is a bug - no need to compare that to anything.

Second item - OK, a comparison here is appropriate but having a larger display area is hardly innovative.

Third item - Poor layout and small font, again that's obvious and doesn't really require any comparison.

All the graphics of the S1 in that iteration are pisspoor, like an 8-year old designed them.

I don't think there is any problem for the Samsung lawyers to paint a totally different picture what this document was all about. I expected Apple to drag out some valid patented design innovations that Samsung copied, not some software verification report that was meant to specifically compare the S1 to the iPhone..
 
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
Top