Should Apple vs Samsung decision stop me from getting GS3?

[534n]

No. Get the GS3 anyway to support Samsung in spite of assle. Even if multitouch gestures and whatever else gets removed "officially," it would be added right back in as an app or open-source project. I just hope that Google gets off its ass and hands apple's to itself by all the breaches on the apple side.

The fact that apple has been awarded some of the vague and obscenely broad patents that it has is appalling. Not to mention that "iPad" technically should not belong to them either, as it was patented by a guy in China long before the apple tablet, and the suit against apple was won by him, and yet apple just continues along screwing everyone. It will eventually be brought out in court and apple will fall. This last move by them in trying to attack Samsung is just blatantly showing how shameless and pathetic they are.

 

[Johnly]

This thread has taken a turn for the better. Yay the Verge.

 

[the1m.polo]

yup its banned on US devices mate. my old nokia n95 had it before the 1st iphone but i guess phone manufacturers werent greedy till apple

And this is why I went from saying "the iphone just isn't for me" to "I hate Apple"... Yes they did a lot for smart phones but. They just implemented a bunch of preexisting tech... Com on! So now you wanna be so greedy to stop innovation and competition when that's what your company is built on!!!!! Oooh I hate em!!... Lol

Sent from my GS3....

 

[Rev2010]

Not to mention that "iPad" technically should not belong to them either, as it was patented by a guy in China long before the apple tablet

It wasn't patented, it was a trademark name:

Introducing the original iPAD, Proview's late '90s iMac-like desktop -- Engadget

Rev.

 

[alanandroid]

DSK123

I'll be honest with you.. I really didn't give it that much thought about how the two devices would work together as one if that makes sense. The iPads the iPad and my phones the phone. Email is easy obviously and the use of Dropbox is handy too. The chrome browser also brings all my bookmarks over to each one too. I think if my job depended on it I would stay with one platform for both. Guess it would be easier really..

alanandroid

 

[534n]

Also, I would like to add that the buttons on some of the devices are NOT in the same place, and even if they were, there are only so many intuitive places to put them. All of apples patents are "obvious to the trade" and it would be like me trying to patent the word "the". Any sentence constructed using the or articles "similar" or with a "similar effect" have to pay me. That is apple. I love how the devices covered in apple's patents don't even look like the drawings. How can they sue for a device being similar to the drawing when apple's isn't?

The greatest yet:
Apple sued Samsung for the zoom gesture. Samsung collaboratively created that gesture and demonstrated it to apple about 10 years ago. apple now claims that they invented it and has the patent.

That story is not uncommon for apple, just like the wifi messenging app that was banned from the app store and then released by apple. After the guy sued apple, they refused to pay him and just took their own app off and let others make and support it, and still banned his.

And for a poll, how many people have EVER bought a Samsung phone or tablet and say "Hey! I thought this was an iphone/pad!" None that I have heard of. The fact that apple claimed that people confuse the Samsungs for theirs is comical.

 

[534n]

It wasn't patented, it was a trademark name:

Introducing the original iPAD, Proview's late '90s iMac-like desktop -- Engadget

Rev.

My bad. Miswording.

 

[Ry]

And for a poll, how many people have EVER bought a Samsung phone or tablet and say "Hey! I thought this was an iphone/pad!" None that I have heard of. The fact that apple claimed that people confuse the Samsungs for theirs is comical.

Evidence exists to prove that this happened at a major retailer in the U.S. Just because you think those people are idiots, doesn't mean it never happened.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[Johnly]

And this is why I went from saying "the iphone just isn't for me" to "I hate Apple"... Yes they did a lot for smart phones but. They just implemented a bunch of preexisting tech... Com on! So now you wanna be so greedy to stop innovation and competition when that's what your company is built on!!!!! Oooh I hate em!!... Lol

Sent from my GS3....

Hate em' HATE. That is a strong word...but it is reserved for those sympathizers...they probably found a good vibration app in the app store and just cant quit them.

 

[534n]

Evidence exists to prove that this happened at a major retailer in the U.S. Just because you think those people are idiots, doesn't mean it never happened.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

I don't think that "people are idiots" is a court case worthy of over a billion dollars. Idiots are the foundation of many economies as much as suckers. If a salesperson sells a Samsung as an iphone, that is not Samsung's fault, and that salesperson should be held partially responsible (unless of course they are an idiot too) in which case apple is just benefiting from idiots.

 

[pauldroidr2d2]

I have been planning to get the Galaxy 3, moving from Apple iPhone3G. Everything I have seen and read about the SG3 has convinced me this is the right decision for me: bigger screen, more customizable, etc. Many have obviously made the same move from iPhone to G3.

For one reason or another, I have been slow to get the G3, and now I am wondering if I should hold off. Maybe wait until Sept unveiling of iPhone 5.

I know the G3 will not change, but will Android become less good in the future (I am buying into the whole new Android system)? Will the lawsuit loss lead to less upgrades for Android, less suitable phones in the future, etc?

I know nothing changes now. The G3 will be the same, running ICS and maybe JB in future. However, maybe innovation for Android will be diminished in the future, 2-3 years from now?

I am surprised no one has asked this question, but seems something many people must be considering.

I wouldn't let the court decision stop me from getting the S3.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

 

[pauldroidr2d2]

Evidence exists to prove that this happened at a major retailer in the U.S. Just because you think those people are idiots, doesn't mean it never happened.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

There is a difference between ignorance and idiocy in my opinion. I think that some folks forget that not everyone spends time at sites like this one. I'm willing to bet some folks don't know that the iPhone is made by Apple and only know it by the iPhone.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Ry]

There is a difference between ignorance and idiocy in my opinion. I think that some folks forget that not everyone spends time at sites like this one. I'm willing to bet some folks don't know that the iPhone is made by Apple and only know it by the iPhone.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

Agreed. I probably should have chosen my words more carefully.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[funkylogik]

And this is why I went from saying "the iphone just isn't for me" to "I hate Apple"... Yes they did a lot for smart phones but. They just implemented a bunch of preexisting tech... Com on! So now you wanna be so greedy to stop innovation and competition when that's what your company is built on!!!!! Oooh I hate em!!... Lol

Sent from my GS3....

+1 Polo

 

[XChrisX]

They awarded Apple with the pinch to zoom and double tap to zoom patent. So my understanding is that any device other than an iphone that has this feature will likely have to pay Apple for that license. Ridiculous!!!!

Multitouch seems so commonplace now but when Steve Jobs unveiled the original iPhone in 2007 people went nuts for basic features such as "slide to unlock", and general tap to zoom, and pinch to zoom. Heck, when he famously said "And, boy have we patented it!" The whole room erupted in thunderous applause. The only problem I see isn't with Apple licensing the patents, but rather them charging a hefty fee for them. Apple makes a killer mobile OS in my opinion, but the same 3.5" form factor year after year is a bit dated now in light of all of the 4"+ monsters. My 2 cents.

 

[Ry]

The only problem I see isn't with Apple licensing the patents, but rather them charging a hefty fee for them.

Agreed.

Let's not forget - Apple did try to settle with Samsung.

 

[GMJeff]

Apple could have cared less about settling with Samsung. They knew they were heading into a courtroom heavily favored because Samsung didn't have all of their eggs in one basket. Apple was the shark in the pool and Samsung was the bleeding victim.

Apple wanted a heavy sledgehammer like verdict and received it. It was a way of telling Samsung not to play in their sandbox.

As for the SIII, Apple didn't include it in the original lawsuit because it hadn't been released yet. They did try to include the first Galaxy Note, but i guess they couldn't find enough evidence of copying due to the newer touchwiz interface that had been updated from previous versions.

All in all, as for the hating Apple thing..............I am 100% for it.

The iceberg is coming, and will soon meet Apple's Titanic ego.

Sent from my GT-N8013 using Android Central Forums

 

[534n]

Let's also not forget, again, that apple did not develop many of the things it has patents for. I seriously, SERIOUSLY, hope the giant Google does the same thing to apple and then some as it did to Samsung. I would love to see apple be the whimpering dog.

DWa!

 

[Ry]

Let's also not forget, again, that apple did not develop many of the things it has patents for. I seriously, SERIOUSLY, hope the giant Google does the same thing to apple and then some as it did to Samsung. I would love to see apple be the whimpering dog.

DWa!

I'd ask you to prove your statement that "Apple did not develop many of the things it has patents for" but you probably wouldn't want to look it up and back up your statement with facts.

 

[534n]

I'd ask you to prove your statement that "Apple did not develop many of the things it has patents for" but you probably wouldn't want to look it up and back up your statement with facts.

I could ask you to do the same thing and show that they did. I have already listed one item that was found that came before apple's patent. I will get the others and find the original dev when I have a little time. I appreciate your sarcasm in support for your interests, though.