Samsung Ready to Battle Apple in Patent War

I confuse Apple products with Samsung products all the time; iPad/Galaxy Tab, iPhone/Galaxy S, iPod/Galaxy Player…. They just look too much alike and their names are so similar that it’s hard for me to be able to differentiate them….

I confuse Apple products with Samsung products all the time; iPad/Galaxy Tab, iPhone/Galaxy S, iPod/Galaxy Player…. They just look too much alike and their names are so similar that it’s hard for me to be able to differentiate them….

I must admit, they are very similar. I mean look at the icons, they both use sticky note icon for notes app, and the color for both is yellow/orange!!!! And for music app they both use that universal music note symbol although Samsung uses CD in the back but that is irrelevant. And how dare Samsung use that Telephone Symbol for the phone part!!! Don’t they know that Apple invented everything??? Telephone, Smartphone, Tablet, Apps, Windows, Gui, Mouse, Web Browser, Finger Gestures, Music, CD’s, Movies the list foes on and on. All hail the mighty Apple and use their products now!!!

I must admit, they are very similar. I mean look at the icons, they both use sticky note icon for notes app, and the color for both is yellow/orange!!!! And for music app they both use that universal music note symbol although Samsung uses CD in the back but that is irrelevant. And how dare Samsung use that Telephone Symbol for the phone part!!! Don’t they know that Apple invented everything??? Telephone, Smartphone, Tablet, Apps, Windows, Gui, Mouse, Web Browser, Finger Gestures, Music, CD’s, Movies the list foes on and on. All hail the mighty Apple and use their products now!!!

The elements listed under “trade dress” infringements include “a rectangular product shape with all four corners uniformly rounded,” “the front surface of the product dominated by a screen surface with black borders,” “a metallic surround framing the perimeter of the top surface,” and other characteristics used to describe a flat slab with a touchscreen.
————————————————————
How many ways are there to design a cell phone? How about an elongated “u”-shape? Or maybe something that resembles a hammer? Couldn’t do that. You’d face lawsuits from hammer manufacturers.

For a comparable example, think about all the flat screen televisions out there. The one common characteristic is the near-universal use of a black border around the viewing area. The reason? The contrast makes it easier on the eyes to watch the viewing screen. Televisions did this long before Apple introduced the iPhone, which WAS NOT the first touchscreen phone, nor was it the first phone to primarily use touch only as the interface between user and device. The iPhone was also not the first device with a screen to utilize this black-border approach. This all falls under the same shenanigans Apple is trying to pull by arguing that they should be allowed to trademark the term “app store”. That’s like if IBM tried to trademark the term “computer”.

Steve Jobs would like people to think that it was him that invented the cellphone, never-mind the touchscreen variety. I’m surprised he hasn’t claimed he invented the toaster or the television. I can’t wait until someone/something finally kicks that pompous a-hole off his perch.

The elements listed under “trade dress” infringements include “a rectangular product shape with all four corners uniformly rounded,” “the front surface of the product dominated by a screen surface with black borders,” “a metallic surround framing the perimeter of the top surface,” and other characteristics used to describe a flat slab with a touchscreen.
————————————————————
How many ways are there to design a cell phone? How about an elongated “u”-shape? Or maybe something that resembles a hammer? Couldn’t do that. You’d face lawsuits from hammer manufacturers.

For a comparable example, think about all the flat screen televisions out there. The one common characteristic is the near-universal use of a black border around the viewing area. The reason? The contrast makes it easier on the eyes to watch the viewing screen. Televisions did this long before Apple introduced the iPhone, which WAS NOT the first touchscreen phone, nor was it the first phone to primarily use touch only as the interface between user and device. The iPhone was also not the first device with a screen to utilize this black-border approach. This all falls under the same shenanigans Apple is trying to pull by arguing that they should be allowed to trademark the term “app store”. That’s like if IBM tried to trademark the term “computer”.

Steve Jobs would like people to think that it was him that invented the cellphone, never-mind the touchscreen variety. I’m surprised he hasn’t claimed he invented the toaster or the television. I can’t wait until someone/something finally kicks that pompous a-hole off his perch.

actual confusion will be an issue in trademark lawsuit, but this is a patent war. we will see.

actual confusion will be an issue in trademark lawsuit, but this is a patent war. we will see.

This is fail. Are we going to see another of those ‘I patented showing a red dot in the upper left-hand corner’ lawsuits? Jesus Christ. You would think they wanted to patent it all and be another BuynLarge.

This is fail. Are we going to see another of those ‘I patented showing a red dot in the upper left-hand corner’ lawsuits? Jesus Christ. You would think they wanted to patent it all and be another BuynLarge.

If I were Samsung Apple would have a lot of supply problems for their devices.

If I were Samsung Apple would have a lot of supply problems for their devices.

Anyone comes up with a better product Apple Sues them.

What a joke Steve Jobs…….

Get a life…. Come up with something new or Apple is gone sooner than you think

How many phones does apple have? ONE and how many does Samsung or any other manufacturer have…..lol

Anyone comes up with a better product Apple Sues them.

What a joke Steve Jobs…….

Get a life…. Come up with something new or Apple is gone sooner than you think

How many phones does apple have? ONE and how many does Samsung or any other manufacturer have…..lol

“… the lawsuit shows that Apple isn’t afraid to sue anyone when it comes to its intellectual property …”

I believe it also shows a few other important things:

* Apple is prepared to walk away from Samsung and therefore has another technology vendor in the wings, ready to replace Samsung if need be.

* Apple hasn’t learned from its past mistakes. It tried this same tactic back in the 80s. It backfired then, and it will fail now, for the same basic reasons.

* Apple believes that U.S. patent law protects intuitive, non-unique features which are necessarily and naturally shared between all smartphone designs.

* Apple is relying on the possibility that both the consumer and the technology sectors will forget Apple’s same sort of hypocritical, arrogant, and clueless practices from the past.

* This Apple action also reveals that they are, in practical fact, actually trying to control the very concept of a handheld, Internet-enabled application and information device (i.e. they’re trying to own the idea of the smartphone).

* Apple is prepared to take on all legal comers, such as LG, who could certainly squeeze out every drop of rainbow-colored blood for Apple’s infringement on LG designs.

* Apple has an unrealistic sense of perpetual market supremacy, infallibility, and general correctness.

Give me a break.

“… the lawsuit shows that Apple isn’t afraid to sue anyone when it comes to its intellectual property …”

I believe it also shows a few other important things:

* Apple is prepared to walk away from Samsung and therefore has another technology vendor in the wings, ready to replace Samsung if need be.

* Apple hasn’t learned from its past mistakes. It tried this same tactic back in the 80s. It backfired then, and it will fail now, for the same basic reasons.

* Apple believes that U.S. patent law protects intuitive, non-unique features which are necessarily and naturally shared between all smartphone designs.

* Apple is relying on the possibility that both the consumer and the technology sectors will forget Apple’s same sort of hypocritical, arrogant, and clueless practices from the past.

* This Apple action also reveals that they are, in practical fact, actually trying to control the very concept of a handheld, Internet-enabled application and information device (i.e. they’re trying to own the idea of the smartphone).

* Apple is prepared to take on all legal comers, such as LG, who could certainly squeeze out every drop of rainbow-colored blood for Apple’s infringement on LG designs.

* Apple has an unrealistic sense of perpetual market supremacy, infallibility, and general correctness.

Give me a break.

My Motorola Cliq violates each of the examples of “trade dress” that is noted in this article. As described they seem ridiculously vague. I hope Samsung eats Apple for lunch.

Um…Could there be another angle to this? For example, take on Microsloth which some folks forecast to be the smartphone leader by 2015 (that’s the year that pigs will be able to fly) by prevailing over Samsung (a non-US company) first. Or some other legal maneuver that doesn’t meet the eye at first? Samsung may not be Apple’s first-tier competitor at least for now. What about HTC, for example? So, why pick a fight with Samsung first … yadda, yadda, yadda?

Um…Could there be another angle to this? For example, take on Microsloth which some folks forecast to be the smartphone leader by 2015 (that’s the year that pigs will be able to fly) by prevailing over Samsung (a non-US company) first. Or some other legal maneuver that doesn’t meet the eye at first? Samsung may not be Apple’s first-tier competitor at least for now. What about HTC, for example? So, why pick a fight with Samsung first … yadda, yadda, yadda?

Um…Could there be another angle to this? For example, take on Microsloth which some folks forecast to be the smartphone leader by 2015 (that’s the year that pigs will be able to fly) by prevailing over Samsung (a non-US company) first. Or some other legal maneuver that doesn’t meet the eye at first? Samsung may not be Apple’s first-tier competitor at least for now. What about HTC, for example? So, why pick a fight with Samsung first … yadda, yadda, yadda?

Um…Could there be another angle to this? For example, take on Microsloth which some folks forecast to be the smartphone leader by 2015 (that’s the year that pigs will be able to fly) by prevailing over Samsung (a non-US company) first. Or some other legal maneuver that doesn’t meet the eye at first? Samsung may not be Apple’s first-tier competitor at least for now. What about HTC, for example? So, why pick a fight with Samsung first … yadda, yadda, yadda?

Um…Could there be another angle to this? For example, take on Microsloth which some folks forecast to be the smartphone leader by 2015 (that’s the year that pigs will be able to fly) by prevailing over Samsung (a non-US company) first. Or some other legal maneuver that doesn’t meet the eye at first? Samsung may not be Apple’s first-tier competitor at least for now. What about HTC, for example? So, why pick a fight with Samsung first … yadda, yadda, yadda?

Um…Could there be another angle to this? For example, take on Microsloth which some folks forecast to be the smartphone leader by 2015 (that’s the year that pigs will be able to fly) by prevailing over Samsung (a non-US company) first. Or some other legal maneuver that doesn’t meet the eye at first? Samsung may not be Apple’s first-tier competitor at least for now. What about HTC, for example? So, why pick a fight with Samsung first … yadda, yadda, yadda?

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

He really needs to get a life, esp. lying in ICU

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Samsung…be prepared to lose.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Take a detergent. Put it in a package that resembles Tide. Get sued and lose. That is the way it is. Tide or iPhone…all the same.

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

Microsoft has the capacity (i.e. future potential) of being just as hypocritical, clueless, and arrogant as Apple. Therefore, they have the same chance of failure. But so far, Microsoft has in my view mastered and dominated the single most-important technology area touching this particular argument — the area of software. They became the “software masters” through

- A bit of luck along the way
- A lot of really hard work
- Recognizing, supporting, creating, and/or controlling key software segments, such as OS, office productivity, and interoperability standards
- Attracting and retaining some really talented folks
- Reinventing themselves as a reinventable company
- Pioneering new architectural and software development technologies
- Building a large developer-support and relations machine
- Correctly recognizing that software is the most key technology, not chip-sets, whiz-bang, cool gadgets, or other temporary blips on the market’s radar
- And most importantly, listening and responding to real customers.

I don’t own a dime of Microsoft stock. But I’ve been a computer user and a software engineer for over 30 years, and I think I’ve just about seen it all. Therefore, the above summary opinion is not just shooting from the hip.

All that leads up to my real point, which is — if Microsoft avoids Apple’s glaringly stupid gaffes in perception at this formative stage in the intelligent-device market (it’s certainly had enough glaringly stupid mistakes of its own already), and continues to capitalize on its strengths (especially customer responsiveness and its loyalty to customer requirements), Microsoft has a great chance of eventually predominating as the majority vendor of mobile device software. And the company that dominates the software leads the industry.

There’s my 2 (or 3 or 4) cents …

apple grow up. there are many similar shaped phones like iphones before iphones. Apple is just scared of android that is all.

apple grow up. there are many similar shaped phones like iphones before iphones. Apple is just scared of android that is all.

apple grow up. there are many similar shaped phones like iphones before iphones. Apple is just scared of android that is all.

Automotive manufacturers do this all the time. If something is aesthetically pleasing, it will be emulated.

Automotive manufacturers do this all the time. If something is aesthetically pleasing, it will be emulated.

Give us a break Apple and stop being greedy. People want choices.

I really hope Samsung loses this battle. I lived in Korea for 2 1/2 years and believe they cannot produce anything innovative on their own. Most Koreans would agree with me on this point. Videogames, electronics, clothes, and everything else are just copied from Western brands. Samsung is not an innovative company at all.

I really hope Samsung loses this battle. I lived in Korea for 2 1/2 years and believe they cannot produce anything innovative on their own. Most Koreans would agree with me on this point. Videogames, electronics, clothes, and everything else are just copied from Western brands. Samsung is not an innovative company at all.

Looking forward to the day where LG finals says, “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!” and files their lawsuit against Apple. Some of you may have heard of the LG PRADA. Well, it was revealed months before Apple’s iPhone. This is a classic case of the proverbial pot calling the kettle black. Remember Al Gore claiming he invented the internet?I can hear Steve Jobs now:

“The world owes me an eternal debt of gratitude for providing them a handheld telecommunications device that has the ability to run apps, play music, and make phone calls, all without the use of buttons. I call it: smartphone.”

Except the iPhone was a pretty “dumb” phone when it came out. There were plenty of non-touchscreen phones in 2007 that had plenty more capabilities than the iPhone. I always laughed at the suggestion that the iPhone was the best “smartphone” on the market. My Nokia E61i ran circles around the iPhone.

Looks like a pretty blatant rip off to me

http://thisismynext.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/2011-04-19applesam7.jpg

Looks like a pretty blatant rip off to me

http://thisismynext.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/2011-04-19applesam7.jpg

Thank you Dave. Finland is awesome!

That looks a lot like a touchscreen surrounded by a black border. Surprised Steve Jobs has sued them as well.

Thank you Dave. Finland is awesome!

That looks a lot like a touchscreen surrounded by a black border. Surprised Steve Jobs has sued them as well.

Leave it to apple to trademark a rectangle

Leave it to apple to trademark a rectangle

Paramount Pictures calling Apple.

The estate of Gene Roddenberry wants their PADD idea back,
or all of last year’s profits. Steve Jobs gets to pick.

but what´s the true?
apple is nervous about the screen size,
the cell needs a 6-7 screen size, but is about trends,
not until 2 years, maybe.

but what´s the true?
apple is nervous about the screen size,
the cell needs a 6-7 screen size, but is about trends,
not until 2 years, maybe.

How many people associate another product with LG Prada? Exactly a BIG FAT ZERO.

How many people associate another product with LG Prada? Exactly a BIG FAT ZERO.

How many people associate another product with LG Prada? Exactly a BIG FAT ZERO.

How many people associate another product with LG Prada? Exactly a BIG FAT ZERO.

You seem to know it all.

You seem to know it all.

You seem to know it all.

You seem to know it all.

Did you know that Samsung semiconductor hates Samsung phones?

Did you know that Samsung semiconductor hates Samsung phones?

Did you know that Samsung semiconductor hates Samsung phones?

Did you know that Samsung semiconductor hates Samsung phones?

So anyone who make a bunch of crappy phones for the landfill is the winner according to you. You need to get some basic elementary school education. My first grader can do a better analysis that you.

So anyone who make a bunch of crappy phones for the landfill is the winner according to you. You need to get some basic elementary school education. My first grader can do a better analysis that you.

So anyone who make a bunch of crappy phones for the landfill is the winner according to you. You need to get some basic elementary school education. My first grader can do a better analysis that you.

So anyone who make a bunch of crappy phones for the landfill is the winner according to you. You need to get some basic elementary school education. My first grader can do a better analysis that you.

Choices != Copying

Looks like the cold in Finland has frozen your brain. Get some electric shock to thaw it.

Looks like the cold in Finland has frozen your brain. Get some electric shock to thaw it.

Looks like the cold in Finland has frozen your brain. Get some electric shock to thaw it.

The people at LG do. They have felt ripped off ever since the iPhone came out. Just because the LG Prada didn’t sell nearly as many phones as Apple sold iPhones doesn’t discount the very real likelihood that Apple’s “original” iPhone might not be original at all. It wouldn’t matter if they only sold 10 of them. It certainly doesn’t matter if no one associates any products with it.

Take in mind that the LG Prada won a design award in 2006 (I believe in September of 2006). That was nearly 9 months before it wad released, and 10 months before the iPhone was released.

Do you know where apple compares in voice quality in comparison to other phones…. Is asking apple to give an average voice quality asking for too much.

if other phones are all crappy I dont know what word to give iphone. crappier.. or something like that……

just because they are the best in advertisement and marketing does not make it better in quality…. remember looks are deceiving..

But has your first grader proven how biased he is in regards to Apple like you have?

A simple check of your comment history would show just how biased you are. As such, your opinion, while exactly that, YOUR OPINION, is just hard to take seriously. If you could step back and perhaps realize, OMG Apple is being ridiculous. Then maybe we’d have reason to listen to what you say. But chances are, you’re eagerly awaiting the moment when Apple does say “We invented the tablet. We invented black bezels. We invented the rectangular cell phone. Anyone who uses any of these things or attempts to build them is violating Apple copyright/trademark.” And then you’ll nerdgasm and die.

another point.. apple copied everything in iphone and smartly ( you have to give them that) put it together.

Take the touch screen (they were not the first at it)
take the accelerator (again cop)
take the round corners
take the wireless chipset
take anything for that matter

Is that you Stevie Wonder?

Is that you Stevie Wonder?

Yeah, that’s right Steve Jobs. Stop being the most respected and most successful business man in the world, who has personally steered the PC industry in his own direction since 1976 and is now heading up the worlds wealthiest technology company, who’s products are regarded as industry benchmarks by everyone with a clue….

..and start taking advice from anonymous fanboi posters like ‘BDallas’ in the comments section of wired

…Yeah, what an idiot xO

Your comments suggest mild mental illness.

They also get significant (and totally unfair!) protection from the Korean government. It is only recently that the iPhone has gone on sale in South Korea due to public demand. Previously apple were not allowed to sell iPhone there.
Another reason why a stop by the Wired comments sections sometimes to piss myself laughing at the retards who slag off apple (one of a handful of companies actually interested in how their devices work) simply because the guy at Samsung’s PR dept told them to. Sad, sad, bitches, but then I guess that’s the only demographic left for these ‘also ran’ companies, and as Fandroid sales have shown, there are plenty of them out there!

They also get significant (and totally unfair!) protection from the Korean government. It is only recently that the iPhone has gone on sale in South Korea due to public demand. Previously apple were not allowed to sell iPhone there.
Another reason why a stop by the Wired comments sections sometimes to piss myself laughing at the retards who slag off apple (one of a handful of companies actually interested in how their devices work) simply because the guy at Samsung’s PR dept told them to. Sad, sad, bitches, but then I guess that’s the only demographic left for these ‘also ran’ companies, and as Fandroid sales have shown, there are plenty of them out there!

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

I stopped reading at ‘Microsoft’ ;D …I don’t know if you realise but it is not 1990 anymore.

Really? That’s the best you can come up with?

I say he’s biased and his comment history proves this, thus what he says doesn’t really matter. And the best you can come up with is “mild mental illness”? F*cking pathetic. This is why I try not to insult people online. Because most of the people I’d respond to just can’t compete with me.

And no, I have no mental illness whatsoever. But as for stupidity in general, I believe you are champ. I’d say “nice try” but that really wasn’t. (That’s on your part I mean, just in case that goes over your head.)

Oh. After a quick check, your comment history also shows a bias and possible fanboyness towards Apple. I’m sorry. There’s nothing we can do for you. Besides suggest you seek help for that.

(On a side note, I own a Macbook and iPod. Don’t have a problem with Apple per se. Just NOT A BLIND FOLLOWER like yourself or the guy I replied to. Well, that and I like to get my money’s worth. Which is why I laughed at my friend recently. She spent $1500 on a Macbook. And it’s got so many problems I just laughed and said “yeah Apple’s the best I remember you saying, still sticking with that statement are you?” Meanwhile, the $500 Compaq I got at Radioshack at the same time as she got her Macbook is still going strong.)

As for my comments in general. They suggest that unlike some people (looking at you here) I am not biased or partial to any one company or product. That I actually can write (without tons of spelling or grammatical errors). I have a sense of humor. Am a reasonable person and can back up what I say with logic and facts. And don’t feel a need to insult people because they don’t like the products that I do (again, looking at you here).

Get lost kid. You have no reason even bothering to reply to me. It just makes you look more pathetic. And I really don’t feel a need to further put you down or make you look like an idiot. It’s not really a challenge to do either of those things. And thus not that much fun.

All I can say is, it’s about time. Ever since the first iPhone came out, every smart-device made by Samsung is a blatant copy of an Apple device. LG also does this. For whatever reason, Samsung thinks it can get away with trademark infringement. This is not an iOS vs Android rivalry; it’s the simple fact that the design team at Samsung has no clue, and consistently resort to copying Apple. Notice that they don’t rip-off Nokia or Sony/Ericsson or Motorola. If they did, those companies would sue Samsung too. Not trying to defend Apple here, but their designers spend lots of time to come up with original ideas, ideas that shouldn’t just be cut-and-pasted onto another company that’s making money from them. It ain’t free, Samsung…

can I write a single sentence to spark such fury in you?

get a life.

why am I brian x. chen? testo. I never even registered here.

is brian x. chen like “anonymous” or something

Whoaaa… looks like I was right… sorry, didn’t mean to mock your illness.

They’re suing Samsung, because their phone is also RECTANGLE, and has ROUNDED EDGES and… my favourite…. a SCREEN?!!?!? Apple has lost its mind. The consumerist junkies who have been brainwahsed by marketing (and nothing more) will hang on for a bit, but the rest of the world is waking up. When my iphone broke after a year (like they design them to), I’d had enough and swapped phones. I refuse to buy an ipad. I still have my macbook, but when that goes, I’m outta apple world for good. Their technology is great, their design is beautiful, sure… but their business ethos is horrifying, in the way it treats other companies (such as seen inn this case, but also their bullying of Adobe) and the way they treat the public with overpricing, flimsy hardware and closed platforms. Ciao, Apple.

Lol. Aww you poor child. You aren’t mocking me. If anything I just mocked you. The only mental problem I have is mild annoyance with you and your childishness. You’re upset because you just got dissed. And because you realize you have no real come back. For proof, just look at what you just wrote.

Just give up. You got insulted after trying to talk sh*t. And done so by someone with way more skill at insulting people than you have. There’s no shame in admitting defeat. It’s good for you. It’ll help you grow as a person and learn from the experience. The lesson you can take away from this is: I, XCOM5, am an idiot. I should not bother trying to insult electric_worry because he will verbally b*tchslap me. It only makes me look childish and petty when I keep replying after the fact.

It’s okay. Go upstairs, walk out of the basement and ask mommy for a hug. Because the mean old 25 year old hurt your feelings and made you cry. I’m sure she’ll oblige you. Respond again, and you’ll go from being a mild annoyance to a pest. And pests have to be dealt with appropriately and the gloves will come off as far as how badly I’m going to put you down. Ciao.

This is one big battle to remember!!..

They say the Tab has “a display of a grid of colorful square icons with uniformly rounded corners.” and include a screenshot. The screenshot is of the third out of 5 home screens and, at least on my tab, the third screen started off empty. The initially populated screen has a couple of non-square widgets on but I guess that wouldn’t go down too well with the claims. So am I to understand that it doesn’t infringe out of the box but only after an Apple lawyer has spent some time setting it up to look like an iPad?

Only because the case is in the states, in this instance I hope Apple lose and lose hard, no one should be able to patent/copyright a shape that is in standard use or is the most logical one for a handset.

No, are you Mr.Koolaid?

Do you bath in KoolAid as well as drink and eat it? Apple right now has produced in the mobile phone/music player the benchmark products, I agree. But since the 70’s? you don’t know your history at all do you. NeXT? Microsoft, Sony Walkman, Nokia, IBM, all lead the computer/personal fun sh*t industry and have every chance of fighting back and doing something incredible, possibly even by taking an Apple product and improving on it (something Apple does all the time as well.)

The weird thing is that all you Kool aid drinkers seem to think that Apple is some sort of cool, counter culture product, sticking it to the man and generally being hip, trendy, rebellious and possibly a world of other stuff. When it is in fact, a seriously litigious, expensive, all about itself (very closed world) and so mainstream as to be ridiculous. Yet you all run around worshiping a tech company, get a life.

I’m just surprised it didn’t happen sooner!

Yeah, give my regards to your shrink bitch.

maybe you can find answers here:

==== http://clothesmall .org ====
50%off ca,ed hardy t-shirt$15 jeans,coach handbag$33,air max90,dunk,polo t-shirt$13,,lacoste t-shirt $13 air jordan for sale,$35,nfl nba jersy for sale

puma gucci$35,nike jordans six ring,yeezy$%5!!

new era caps$13 gucci handbags jeans,t-shirts sunglass,caps

true religion jeans$35,ca,ed hardy jeans$35

LV,CHANAL,HANDBAGS$35

NIKE SHOX+AIR MAX+TL3+OZ+NZ ONLY $35

UGG TIMBLAND+LACOSTE SHOES+ED HARDY SHOES$35

DIESEL T-SHIRT,GSTAR T-SHIRT,CA T-SHIRT,50% OFF FOR SALE $15

DIOR SUNGLASS,DG SUNGLASS$15

our websit:
=== http://clothesmall. org ====

man, who turned up the gay in here? oh.. you did. typical apple moron

man, who turned up the gay in here? oh.. you did. typical apple moron

var choices = []
for (var good in AppleIdeas) {
choices.push(AppleIdeas[good].extend(better))
}

in short..

choices == AppleIdeas + better

Have you been to a grocery store lately? Half the off-brand detergents are packaged to look as much like Tide as possible without infringing on their trademarks. A more suitable analog would be if Tide sued you because your detergent was also “white powdery detergent granules that dilute into water to facilitate clothing cleansing”

Have you been to a grocery store lately? Half the off-brand detergents are packaged to look as much like Tide as possible without infringing on their trademarks. A more suitable analog would be if Tide sued you because your detergent was also “white powdery detergent granules that dilute into water to facilitate clothing cleansing”