Apple's Next Lawsuit: Apple v. Nokia

[stealthify]

Would make for a very nerdy monty python skit...

[IPD]

nick's posting the info before i can get it. damn these work-hours in dirka-dirkastan

[NickS VR4]

Lol. I have droid life on my Facebook so I get a feed of topics on there.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[IPD]

apple's "new" apology. still not a fricking apology. no expression of regret/remorse = NOT AN APOLOGY.

DailyTech - Quick Note: Apple's Rewritten Apology to Samsung Appears in UK Newspapers

of interesting note:

Anthropologist: Apple is a religion | Technically Incorrect - CNET News

i myself have already noted 3 distinct similarities between apple and N. Korea, so for an anthropologist to see similarities between apple and cult-like behavior doesn't surprise me in the least.

oh, and for shits and giggles:

What apple sees:


and what's actually true:

[stealthify]

apple's "new" apology. still not a fricking apology. no expression of regret/remorse = NOT AN APOLOGY.

DailyTech - Quick Note: Apple's Rewritten Apology to Samsung Appears in UK Newspapers

of interesting note:

Anthropologist: Apple is a religion | Technically Incorrect - CNET News

i myself have already noted 3 distinct similarities between apple and N. Korea, so for an anthropologist to see similarities between apple and cult-like behavior doesn't surprise me in the least.

Just goes to show you haven't been paying attention, or reading beyond the bias headlines.

The judge didn't tell Apple to apologize. He ordered them to post a notice that, in his court, he did not find Samsung to be infringing on Apple's design. Beyond that, he went as far as to say the reason Samsung didn't infringe was because Samsung's design "wasn't cool enough."

Apple posted all of that and then some. No where did the judge ask Apple to apologize:

Judge Says Apple Must Publish Notice Regarding Samsung

"The notice should outline the July 9 London court decision that Samsung’s Galaxy tablets don’t infringe Apple’s registered designs" Judge Colin Birss said.

As far as comparing Apple fans to a cult, which is a tired argument now: find me one well-liked brand or product that doesn't have a passionate fanbase that can be called a cult and I'll give you a cookie.

[IPD]

Just goes to show you haven't been paying attention, or reading beyond the bias headlines.

The judge didn't tell Apple to apologize. He ordered them to post a notice that, in his court, he did not find Samsung to be infringing on Apple's design. Beyond that, he went as far as to say the reason Samsung didn't infringe was because Samsung's design "wasn't cool enough."

Apple posted all of that and then some. No where did the judge ask Apple to apologize:

Judge Says Apple Must Publish Notice Regarding Samsung



As far as comparing Apple fans to a cult, which is a tired argument now: find me one well-liked brand or product that doesn't have a passionate fanbase that can be called a cult and I'll give you a cookie.

passion is one thing. we're talking rabid-hysteria.

[NickS VR4]

Apple UK updates Samsung statement, but makes sure people don’t see it

And apple makes their site purposely put it off screen w/o scrolling through styling code. Makes sure it is the only part off screen.

[IPD]

par for the course. apple gives another giant FU to the courts that don't agree with their own lawyers. this is the classic example of WHY i hate apple. i don't hate competition. i don't hate innovation.

i hate that apple's vision is one of a world in which they are the only legitimate manufacturer of smartphones or tablets. that they would rather litigate than compete. that they apparently spend more on their legal team than their product dveleopment team (by a wide margin). that they choose to abuse the broken patent system by trying to claim prior art (from everyone between garmin to LG) as their own.

if apple could just put a product to market and then try and improve upon it dramatically with each new product cycle--that would be amazing. instead, we get products that are often scarcely better than the last--because all of the R&D funding apparently went into legal fees to try and convince federal judges in 50 different countries that every single one of its competitors are "ripping off" apple. apple doesn't even need to win. it seeks preliminary injunctions against competing devices--which means that regardless of eventual outcome, if it wins the preliminary, it effectively crushes the competition. those products will be woefully outdated by the time they are allowed to come to market--if at all.

apple has made it perfectly clear that it is willing to outspend all competitors on the legal front as the primary means of proping itself up in the tech market. the only reason that samsung/google get more coverage is because those companies are best equipped to actually go toe-to-toe with apple over its BS litigation. HTC and others simply aren't. I'm not a samsung fan in the least--but i do root for their victories; because i'm against apple. it's like how people voted AGAINST kerry, rather than FOR bush.

antics like the original "apology" and the underhandedness of its new one simply highlight the underlying mindset of the company. apple is evil.

for the record, i didn't hate dell when they were the industry leader. nor hp. nor blackberry. i just hate apple for what apple has become. if apple were a singer, he would sue every other musiciain for stealing the ideas of singings songs about partying or telling someone you love them.

[stealthify]

IPD, it's pretty clear at this point that you have a pretty warped view of Apple.

You know, back in the 90's, this was a whole different deal. Apple didn't adequately patent or protect shit (and neither did Xerox for that matter), but any ground Apple gained or new innovation provided by Apple was stripped by the competition. This included by Microsoft, most of all.

Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When Apple released the initial iPhone in 2007, they knew they had something special on their hands. Everything else in the market was crap and wasn't taking off. You think it was pure luck and a bit of marketing that made the iPhone was a hit? No. They took everything that other phones at the time were doing wrong, and they made it better. That's what made it a hit.

Then what's happened since then? They had a near repeat of exactly what happened a little over a decade before, but instead of Microsoft, we have Google creeping around. Then CEO of Google, Eric Schmidt, gains Steve Job's trust and gets himself a seat on Apple's Board of Directors. While at the same time taking what he's learning at Apple and applying it to Android and Chrome OS. There's absolutely no respect to be gained in that.

And Apple wanting to be the only game in town? That's an impossibility. They knew getting into the smartphone market would bring competition, but they weren't about to let the 90's repeat itself. That's why at the original iPhone introduction keynote they made it a point to declare that "they patented the hell out of it."

Since then, they have had many, many phones emerge as competitors. Those that bluntly copy, most of which happened to come from Samsung, have been brought to court. Those that actually try to be different, have been left alone. The point is, there can be legitimate competition, but they don't need to mimic Apple. Funny enough -- you know which company isn't mimicking Apple these days? Microsoft and the direction they're going with Windows and Windows Phone. Man, how the times have changed.

As far as Apple litigating as opposed to working on R&D? Do your research. Google will help you find it, that's something they're very good at:

Check, Please: Experts Say Apple, Samsung Face Sky-High Legal Fees - Law Blog - WSJ

Mr. Dunner estimated that each side could have spent $10 to $20 million on the case.

Apple increased R&D spending by $1 billion in 2012 | Ars Technica

The filing reveals spending on research and development has grown significantly to $3.4 billion—an increase of $1 billion over 2011

With the Samsung vs Apple case probably being Apple's largest ever, and only costing between $10-20 million, even if you were to add up the smaller cases, it wouldn't even be able to hold a candle to Apple's 3.4 billion in R&D spendings. Nice try though.

Sorry man, but just about everything you say in these anti-Apple threads is FUD.

[NickS VR4]

If apple is the largest tech company in the world, why would any competition out sell apple? If they truly are the innovators, why can't they stay on top?

If Microsoft and Google are copiers, why do they beat apple in a market "they created"?

Its cause apple is not as good as you say.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2