So basically they're going to make Apple appeal on the grounds that the Galaxy Tab is just as cool as the iPad?

That's actually not the reasoning at all. The reasoning was that the court found that there was massive prior art upon which the iPad drew, and was thus not original.

But way to latch onto the troll-bait.

Ha. Almost reads like the judge was paid to give the iPad an endorsement... unless he was "one of those" to begin with.

Hipster Judge

Honestly, the Galaxy is unwieldy as a phone. Other than that, it's pretty neat.

/Can't wait to see phones with holograms

Moreso they're going to make Apple appeal on the grounds that the iPad is not distinctive. Which is more hilarious, given how distinctive the Apple branding is. Sounds like Samsung's legal team are getting a bonus this year. Perhaps enough to afford an iPad.

Nurglitch: Moreso they're going to make Apple appeal on the grounds that the iPad is not distinctive. Which is more hilarious, given how distinctive the Apple branding is.

The branding is distinctive.

The products are not.

bsharitt: So basically they're going to make Apple appeal on the grounds that the Galaxy Tab is just as cool as the iPad?

haha, I can imagine it already.

Your honor. Galaxy Tab is the shiznit. It's awesome, moreso than our iPad. We demand our appeal be approved for Galaxy Tab is just ice cool.

Here is the actual statement:

In a ruling on July 9, 2012, the High Court of England & Wales sided with Samsung that the designs of the Galaxy Tab series of products are 'different' from an Apple tablet design, and do not infringe Apple's Registered Community Design No. 181607-0001. Samsung products subject to this trial were the Galaxy Tab 10.1, the Galaxy Tab 8.9, and the Galaxy Tab 7.7."Samsung had requested this voluntary trial in September 2011, in order to oppose Apple's ongoing efforts to reduce consumer choice and innovation in the tablet market through their excessive legal claims and arguments. Apple has insisted that the three Samsung tablet products infringe several features of Apple's design right, such as 'slightly rounded corners,' 'a flat transparent surface without any ornamentation,' and 'a thin profile.'"However, the High Court dismissed Apple's arguments by referring to approximately 50 examples of prior art, or designs that were previously created or patented, from before 2004. These include the Knight Ridder (1994), the Ozolin (2004), and HP's TC1000 (2003). The court found numerous Apple design features to lack originality, and numerous identical design features to have been visible in a wide range of earlier tablet designs from before 2004."Equally important, the court also found distinct differences between the Samsung and Apple tablet designs, which the court claimed were apparent to the naked eye. For instance, the court cited noticeable differences in the front surface design and in the thinness of the side profile. The court found the most vivid differences in the rear surface design, a part of tablets that allows designers a high degree of freedom for creativity, as there are no display panels, buttons, or any technical functions. Samsung was recognised by the court for having leveraged such conditions of the rear surface to clearly differentiate its tablet products through 'visible detailing.'

Masso: bsharitt: So basically they're going to make Apple appeal on the grounds that the Galaxy Tab is just as cool as the iPad?

haha, I can imagine it already.

Your honor. Galaxy Tab is the shiznit. It's awesome, moreso than our iPad. We demand our appeal be approved for Galaxy Tab is just ice cool.

Microsoft Surface > iMaxiPad and shiatsung Galaxy Abortion

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: That's actually not the reasoning at all. The reasoning was that the court found that there was massive prior art upon which the iPad drew, and was thus not original.

But way to latch onto the troll-bait.

About farking time some sanity reigned in one of these ridiculous patent disputes.

Everybody copies everyone. Everything is a remix. There is no reason Apple should get to stand on the shoulders of giants and knock everyone else off.

This is a UK ruling, who cares? Get back to me when a real judge in an actual country rules. You guys stick to your Cricket, stalking of Royals, and TopGear, and let the adults do the real thinking.

/over the top
//I'll snag a few anyway
///Love the UK, have visited twice

Toy_Cop: Hipster Judge

No, genius-level master troll judge.

Publikwerks: SacriliciousBeerSwiller: That's actually not the reasoning at all. The reasoning was that the court found that there was massive prior art upon which the iPad drew, and was thus not original.

But way to latch onto the troll-bait.

I think someone owns a Galaxy tab

Nah. Don't own a tablet at all. Until they can match the capabilities of a true laptop, they're overblown smart phones.

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Nah. Don't own a tablet at all. Until they can match the capabilities of a true laptop, they're overblown smart phones.

I bathe in wifi zones about 85% of my life, and am considering shucking off a smartphone for a 7" tablet with GrooveIP or CSIP and perhaps a cheap $100 / year pre-paid phone.

Downside: loss of google maps on long distance trips outside the cities.

Possible alternative to 7" tablet, Galaxy Note or Galaxy Note II with thiotimoline.

CygnusDarius: Honestly, the Galaxy is unwieldy as a phone. Other than that, it's pretty neat.

/Can't wait to see phones with holograms

Huh? Galaxy S III phone is far superior to the iPhone 4S, and quite possibly the best phone on the market right now.

The Banana Thug: CygnusDarius: Honestly, the Galaxy is unwieldy as a phone. Other than that, it's pretty neat.

/Can't wait to see phones with holograms

Huh? Galaxy S III phone is far superior to the iPhone 4S, and quite possibly the best phone on the market right now.

Think he meant the Galaxy Note. "Galaxy" is a whole series of products and he just failed to specify which. And in the Note's case, I agree it's too big. The S3 is right about at the limit for screen size before it gets ridiculous IMO.

From the ruling:

"The court found numerous Apple design features to lack originality, and numerous identical design features to have been visible in a wide range of earlier tablet designs from before 2004"

Throught the apple-fan reality distortion field:

"Well, yeah, the judge said samsung didnt infringe.. because... it wasnt as coool!"


This is why the world hates apple users.


Also, obligatory:




Yes, the iPad is nice. No, it is not some sore of novel apple invention. They are just one tablet brand of many.
Yes, the iPhone is nice-ish. No, it is not some sort of novel apple invention (nor is it in the top tier of mobile phones, like it was 2-3 years ago)

Mad_Radhu: Google Maps lets you save map regions for offline use now. Unfortunately, you're limited to squares of less than 80 MB, but you can save multiple map tiles if you need to save a large area. A tablet with built in GPS like the Nexus 7 should allow you to do the navigation just fine while offline if you cache the area before traveling.Plus, it'd just be very appropriate for you to own a Nexus 7.

Yes, well I actually do own a Nexus One.

What I would like to do with Android maps is plan on a web browser some trip, say, San Francisco to Washington DC, designate 8 other cities along the way, and have the maps for those cities AND the tiles for the route itself and the route downloaded to my phone. Right now, I don't believe an Android phone can plan a route and navigate the route without help from a google server.

I love Google Maps, but until I can do that, it's not quite the replacement for a standalone GPS unit (which I don't own) that people have been talking about recently. I have been trying to figure out why Google limits the downloads to 10 areas and I guess there must be some lawsuit or monopoly worry somewhere in there, screwing it all up.

Somewhere along the way, I picked up one of these: http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=Huawei+S7 A Huawei S7. It's actually very similar to a giant Nexus One, except it has a resistive display. But it makes for a terrific in car tablet because it has a huge display, but is not iPad-way-too-large, and it has GPS, and can make phone calls, (and if your sim is expired can still 911 calls.) Ebay has them for about $100, and I'd say they are worth it as carphone/GPS/Netflix/Android device, especially if you have another device that you can hotspot it too (My Nexus One for instance.)

Apple iProducts stopped being cool when they started selling them in Wal-Mart. The iphone and ipad might (or might not) be useful devices, but nothing is cool when sitting next to Faded Glory tighty whiteys and a pallet of Sam's Choice cola.

ISO15693:
Also, obligatory:

[sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net image 640x376]

Microsoft introduced a Tablet PC the same way Google introduced a Samsung Android phone.

So does LG sue ASUS sue ViewSonic sue Dell sue Philips because their flat screen monitors all look (auh!) the same?

Does every Euro/Sino/Koreo/Nippo bug buggy maker sue every other insectmobile maker because they all look like ghastly little Coleopterae on wheels?

Not worried about cool. Loving my tablet.

ISO15693: Yes, the iPad is nice. No, it is not some sore of novel apple invention. They are just one tablet brand of many.
Yes, the iPhone is nice-ish. No, it is not some sort of novel apple invention (nor is it in the top tier of mobile phones, like it was 2-3 years ago)

Actually, the iPad and iPhone are novel Apple inventions. There were neither iPads nor iPhones previously, so they are, by definition, novel. And yes, they were not the first tablet or the first smart phone. Believe it or not, both of those statements can be entirely true, simultaneously.

Theaetetus: ISO15693: Yes, the iPad is nice. No, it is not some sore of novel apple invention. They are just one tablet brand of many.
Yes, the iPhone is nice-ish. No, it is not some sort of novel apple invention (nor is it in the top tier of mobile phones, like it was 2-3 years ago)

Actually, the iPad and iPhone are novel Apple inventions. There were neither iPads nor iPhones previously, so they are, by definition, novel. And yes, they were not the first tablet or the first smart phone. Believe it or not, both of those statements can be entirely true, simultaneously.

Wow, that's a lot of bending there.. Are you a pretzel yet?

The Banana Thug: CygnusDarius: Honestly, the Galaxy is unwieldy as a phone. Other than that, it's pretty neat.

/Can't wait to see phones with holograms

Huh? Galaxy S III phone is far superior to the iPhone 4S, and quite possibly the best phone on the market right now.

I've had an SIII for a couple weeks now and I can honestly say it's the best phone I've ever had. And that's not meant to be an Apple vs. Android knock either.

OriginalGamer: This is a UK ruling, who cares? Get back to me when a real judge in an actual country rules. You guys stick to your Cricket, stalking of Royals, and TopGear, and let the adults do the real thinking.

/over the top
//I'll snag a few anyway
///Love the UK, have visited twice

You've been to this place and you love it? Are you mentally ill?

Theaetetus: ISO15693: Yes, the iPad is nice. No, it is not some sore of novel apple invention. They are just one tablet brand of many.
Yes, the iPhone is nice-ish. No, it is not some sort of novel apple invention (nor is it in the top tier of mobile phones, like it was 2-3 years ago)

Actually, the iPad and iPhone are novel Apple inventions. There were neither iPads nor iPhones previously, so they are, by definition, novel. And yes, they were not the first tablet or the first smart phone. Believe it or not, both of those statements can be entirely true, simultaneously.

No.

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Theaetetus: ISO15693: Yes, the iPad is nice. No, it is not some sore of novel apple invention. They are just one tablet brand of many.
Yes, the iPhone is nice-ish. No, it is not some sort of novel apple invention (nor is it in the top tier of mobile phones, like it was 2-3 years ago)

Actually, the iPad and iPhone are novel Apple inventions. There were neither iPads nor iPhones previously, so they are, by definition, novel. And yes, they were not the first tablet or the first smart phone. Believe it or not, both of those statements can be entirely true, simultaneously.

No.

Because you say so?

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Theaetetus: ISO15693: Yes, the iPad is nice. No, it is not some sore of novel apple invention. They are just one tablet brand of many.
Yes, the iPhone is nice-ish. No, it is not some sort of novel apple invention (nor is it in the top tier of mobile phones, like it was 2-3 years ago)

Actually, the iPad and iPhone are novel Apple inventions. There were neither iPads nor iPhones previously, so they are, by definition, novel. And yes, they were not the first tablet or the first smart phone. Believe it or not, both of those statements can be entirely true, simultaneously.

No.

Uhhh, okay... Apple invented tablets and phones. They also invented electricity, or something. Your rules, bub, not mine.

/eyeroll

Arguing in an Apple Fan boy thread is like owning an Apple product: who cares?