Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Vanity Fair)   Investigative journalist gives us all a great look at how Samsung maintains its strong culture of innovation   (vanityfair.com) divider line 90
    More: Unlikely, Samsung, iSPY Samsung, Ericsson, Galaxy S, Steve Jobs, iPhone, patent infringements, Hitachi  
•       •       •

4124 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 May 2014 at 10:01 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



90 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-05-06 04:33:40 AM  
Excellent article, thanks subby.

I have worked for one of the companies mention that competed against Samsung, and I would agree with the author's position that they regularly incorporate other's intellectual property and rely on long court fights. Nasty.
 
2014-05-06 09:23:21 AM  
I don't see the innovation from Samsung. Don't get me wrong - Apple has done little to get me excited lately, but really the only changes lately from either company seem to be form factors, camera improvements and screen size/resolution.

I have yet to see a completely new idea from anyone other than Google lately.
 
2014-05-06 09:37:22 AM  
Samsung makes Microsoft look like an amateur, but this is Fark so no one will read the article and the Samsung fan-boys will talk about how Apple is worse or at least no better.
 
2014-05-06 09:56:24 AM  

Clent: Samsung makes Microsoft look like an amateur, but this is Fark so no one will read the article and the Samsung fan-boys will talk about how Apple is worse or at least no better.


I don't care for either company much, but a rounded rectangle is not a patent.
 
2014-05-06 10:05:31 AM  

bdub77: Clent: Samsung makes Microsoft look like an amateur, but this is Fark so no one will read the article and the Samsung fan-boys will talk about how Apple is worse or at least no better.

I don't care for either company much, but a rounded rectangle is not a patent.


Well it's a good thing that's not the only issue they're fighting about then.
 
2014-05-06 10:09:19 AM  
The only innovation from Apple was IP theft and long, drawn-out, expensive legal battles.

I'd say Samsung should be charged for copying that particular innovation, sure. Why not.
 
2014-05-06 10:10:06 AM  
Patent shenanigans? This looks like a job for Super Drew!
 
2014-05-06 10:10:36 AM  

bdub77: Clent: Samsung makes Microsoft look like an amateur, but this is Fark so no one will read the article and the Samsung fan-boys will talk about how Apple is worse or at least no better.

I don't care for either company much, but a rounded rectangle is not a patent.


It can be, if it's part of a design patent.
 
2014-05-06 10:15:07 AM  

nulluspixiusdemonica: The only innovation from Apple was IP theft and long, drawn-out, expensive legal battles.

I'd say Samsung should be charged for copying that particular innovation, sure. Why not.


i79.photobucket.com


lol
 
2014-05-06 10:19:49 AM  
I love the back and forth from these two.  Like spoiled children.

Apple's A7 chip (the core that runs the whole damn phone) is manufactured by Samsung.
 
2014-05-06 10:21:33 AM  

Publikwerks: [i79.photobucket.com image 450x450]


Please feel free to point me toward something that Apple "innovated" and I'll concur.
 
2014-05-06 10:22:07 AM  
I don't purchase any Korean products precisely because of they way they do business.
I'm not saying other companies are perfect, just that the Korean companies tend to be the worst offenders.
 
2014-05-06 10:34:51 AM  
The Apple patent on pinch to zoom simply should not have been granted.

This video from 1984, twenty years before the iPhone, shows pinch to zoom. If that is not prior art then what is? The USPO allows the slightest "difference" to consider something new and original and so worthy of a patent. "Oh that showed someone using pinch to zoom in a darkened room wearing a plaid shirt, your application works in daylight and you can wear a T Shirt. Patent granted"
 
2014-05-06 10:35:42 AM  
Having said that my HTC M8 is so much better than the Galaxy and the iPhone....
 
2014-05-06 10:37:19 AM  

nulluspixiusdemonica: Publikwerks: [i79.photobucket.com image 450x450]

Please feel free to point me toward something that Apple "innovated" and I'll concur.


They came up with the rounded rectangle.  That shape never existed in the history of humanity until Steve Jobs emerged from the rounded rectangle obelisk to share his vision with the people of earth.
 
2014-05-06 10:38:42 AM  
Samsung maintains a strong culture of innovation by attending Apple product announcements.
 
2014-05-06 10:39:53 AM  

nulluspixiusdemonica: Publikwerks: [i79.photobucket.com image 450x450]

Please feel free to point me toward something that Apple "innovated" and I'll concur.


The touch interface. Previous to iPhone 1, this is how you used a smart phone:
tecnologiasmoviles.com

Now, I am against patenting all the stuff Apple patented. I have no issue with Samsung using it. But give Apple their props. You may find plently you dislike with iOS, and may think Android is far superior, but if you can't even acknowledged that Apple changed the game with the iPhone, then I'll just put you on ignore and move on.
 
2014-05-06 10:44:03 AM  

Publikwerks: The touch interface. Previous to iPhone 1, this is how you used a smart phone:
tecnologiasmoviles.com


upload.wikimedia.org

LG Prada, announced in December 2006 and released in May 2007. First phone with a capacitive touchscreen interface.

Now, I'm not saying that Apple copied LG or stole their design. The timeline of development for the LG Prada and the iPhone clearly overlaps. But to say that your resistive touch interface is the only way people used touchscreens prior to the iPhone is wrong.
 
2014-05-06 10:47:06 AM  

Publikwerks: nulluspixiusdemonica: Publikwerks: [i79.photobucket.com image 450x450]

Please feel free to point me toward something that Apple "innovated" and I'll concur.

The touch interface. Previous to iPhone 1, this is how you used a smart phone:
[tecnologiasmoviles.com image 480x360]

Now, I am against patenting all the stuff Apple patented. I have no issue with Samsung using it. But give Apple their props. You may find plently you dislike with iOS, and may think Android is far superior, but if you can't even acknowledged that Apple changed the game with the iPhone, then I'll just put you on ignore and move on.


The LG Prada would like a word. Both announced and launched before the iPhone it didn't need a stylus.
 
2014-05-06 10:49:53 AM  

Publikwerks: The touch interface.


http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html

Capacitive interfaces were being meddled with prior to 1960, albeit not on computing devices...

Innovation, please.
 
2014-05-06 10:56:36 AM  

RexTalionis: Publikwerks: The touch interface. Previous to iPhone 1, this is how you used a smart phone:
tecnologiasmoviles.com

[upload.wikimedia.org image 424x600]

LG Prada, announced in December 2006 and released in May 2007. First phone with a capacitive touchscreen interface.

Now, I'm not saying that Apple copied LG or stole their design. The timeline of development for the LG Prada and the iPhone clearly overlaps. But to say that your resistive touch interface is the only way people used touchscreens prior to the iPhone is wrong.


First off, I don't have a "resistive touch interface".

Secondly - I'm not saying that a resistive touch interface was the innovation.  iOS was.They brought everything together in an attractive package that worked well.
 
2014-05-06 11:01:46 AM  

Publikwerks: They brought everything together in an attractive package that worked well.


So the innovation was snapping up/stealing innovation, protecting themselves via litigation, lathering their ill-gotten gains in flash and marketing hype then flogging the lot at hyper-inflated prices to mouth-breathers.

That's actually quite innovative. So, maybe....
 
2014-05-06 11:05:06 AM  

RexTalionis: Publikwerks: The touch interface. Previous to iPhone 1, this is how you used a smart phone:
tecnologiasmoviles.com

[upload.wikimedia.org image 424x600]

LG Prada, announced in December 2006 and released in May 2007. First phone with a capacitive touchscreen interface.

Now, I'm not saying that Apple copied LG or stole their design. The timeline of development for the LG Prada and the iPhone clearly overlaps. But to say that your resistive touch interface is the only way people used touchscreens prior to the iPhone is wrong.


Yeah but you can clearly see by that picture that they stole the rounded rectangle. Let me show you something.

THIS is the Apple IIe.

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com

Note the screen. See its rounded rectangular shape? That sh*t had never been invented before, EVER.
 
2014-05-06 11:05:56 AM  

nulluspixiusdemonica: Publikwerks: The touch interface.

http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html

Capacitive interfaces were being meddled with prior to 1960, albeit not on computing devices...

Innovation, please.


See my above post. Apple didn't invent touch screens. They didn't invent alot of the stuff in the iphone, but they brought it together in a well though out manner that elevated the hardware.

Put it this way - I had a Verizon VX6800:
thumbs3.ebaystatic.com
It had a stylus and touch screen. I could theoretically do all thing things an iphone does. But I couldn't. The interface was so clunky(Windows 6) that it made using it a pain. Of course, I was used to smart phones being a pain(I had a palm before), so it didn't bug me.

The iPhone raised the game. Now, I'm not saying that Android phones aren't good. I have used them, and they are. But Apple did do it first. They pushed everyone else to be better. And everyone else is better.
 
2014-05-06 11:07:07 AM  

Publikwerks: They pushed everyone else to be better. And everyone else is better.


And now they're suing everyone else.
 
2014-05-06 11:07:28 AM  

nulluspixiusdemonica: So the innovation was snapping up/stealing innovation, protecting themselves via litigation, lathering their ill-gotten gains in flash and marketing hype then flogging the lot at hyper-inflated prices to mouth-breathers.


See, this is why we can't have rational discussions. You don't like what I like, so you're a mouth breather.

//...and ignore.
 
2014-05-06 11:09:03 AM  

RexTalionis: Publikwerks: They pushed everyone else to be better. And everyone else is better.

And now they're suing everyone else.


Are you talking about Apple or Samsung?
...or HTC.... Or well, everyone?
 
2014-05-06 11:12:50 AM  

Publikwerks: And everyone else is better.


Disagree as to whether the iPhone was innovative anything other than marketing.

As to whether we're better off? No. We aren't. As consumers, we're losing because innovation is being buried in walled gardens and litigation.

Sod that tripe.

And sod every single fabricator out there for engaging in it.
 
2014-05-06 11:14:28 AM  

bdub77: Clent: Samsung makes Microsoft look like an amateur, but this is Fark so no one will read the article and the Samsung fan-boys will talk about how Apple is worse or at least no better.

I don't care for either company much, but a rounded rectangle is not a patent.


You know how I know you don't know the long history of trade dress?

Trade dress is a legal term of art that generally refers to characteristics of the visual appearance of a product or its packaging (or even the design of a building) that signify the source of the product to consumers. Trade dress is a form of intellectual property.

You can't copy the look of a Coca Cola bottle either.

beachpackagingdesign.com
 
2014-05-06 11:15:29 AM  

Publikwerks: his is why we can't have rational discussions. You don't like what I like, so you're a mouth breather.


Run a support desk for apple users and call me a liar. Biggest collection of technologically challenged throwbacks I have ever met.
 
2014-05-06 11:17:55 AM  

BullBearMS: You know how I know you don't know the long history of trade dress?

Trade dress is a legal term of art that generally refers to characteristics of the visual appearance of a product or its packaging (or even the design of a building) that signify the source of the product to consumers. Trade dress is a form of intellectual property.

You can't copy the look of a Coca Cola bottle either.

beachpackagingdesign.com


Trade dress is a part of trademark law to prevent confusion to customers.

Design patents (the picture you included) is a patent on the ornamental elements of a device or product that is protectable for 14 years (note the design patent for the Coca-Cola bottle expired in 1951).

These are two separate things.

You have no idea what you're talking about.
 
2014-05-06 11:19:03 AM  

Publikwerks: RexTalionis: Publikwerks: The touch interface. Previous to iPhone 1, this is how you used a smart phone:
tecnologiasmoviles.com

[upload.wikimedia.org image 424x600]

LG Prada, announced in December 2006 and released in May 2007. First phone with a capacitive touchscreen interface.

Now, I'm not saying that Apple copied LG or stole their design. The timeline of development for the LG Prada and the iPhone clearly overlaps. But to say that your resistive touch interface is the only way people used touchscreens prior to the iPhone is wrong.

First off, I don't have a "resistive touch interface".

Secondly - I'm not saying that a resistive touch interface was the innovation.  iOS was.They brought everything together in an attractive package that worked well.


You said "Prior to the iPhone every other phone needed a stylus". Which was wrong.
 
2014-05-06 11:26:36 AM  

Flint Ironstag: Publikwerks: RexTalionis: Publikwerks: The touch interface. Previous to iPhone 1, this is how you used a smart phone:
tecnologiasmoviles.com

[upload.wikimedia.org image 424x600]

LG Prada, announced in December 2006 and released in May 2007. First phone with a capacitive touchscreen interface.

Now, I'm not saying that Apple copied LG or stole their design. The timeline of development for the LG Prada and the iPhone clearly overlaps. But to say that your resistive touch interface is the only way people used touchscreens prior to the iPhone is wrong.

First off, I don't have a "resistive touch interface".

Secondly - I'm not saying that a resistive touch interface was the innovation.  iOS was.They brought everything together in an attractive package that worked well.

You said "Prior to the iPhone every other phone needed a stylus". Which was wrong.


Fair enough. However, it doesn't change the validity of my argument that the iPhone changed the perception of what a smartphone should be
 
2014-05-06 11:26:52 AM  

RexTalionis: You have no idea what you're talking about.


Are you still pretending to have a law degree?

Jury: Samsung diluted Apple's trade dress for the iPhone
 
2014-05-06 11:29:51 AM  
The same way Communists managed mimic most our innovations?
 
2014-05-06 11:33:25 AM  

nulluspixiusdemonica: Disagree as to whether the iPhone was innovative anything other than marketing.

As to whether we're better off? No. We aren't. As consumers, we're losing because innovation is being buried in walled gardens and litigation.

Sod that tripe.

And sod every single fabricator out there for engaging in it.


Anybody who thinks the iPhone didn't radically change the smartphone market has either works for BlackBerry or worked for Palm.

Pick up an iPhone, then go pick up an old Treo.  If you don't think we're better off, you're an idiot.
 
2014-05-06 11:33:25 AM  

Publikwerks: See my above post. Apple didn't invent touch screens. They didn't invent alot of the stuff in the iphone, but they brought it together in a well though out manner that elevated the hardware.


But you'll put anyone who disagrees with you about Apple innovation on ignore.

So... you are putting yourself on ignore?

F*cking drama queen it much? Over a phone?
 
2014-05-06 11:33:28 AM  

BullBearMS: RexTalionis: You have no idea what you're talking about.

Are you still pretending to have a law degree?

Jury: Samsung diluted Apple's trade dress for the iPhone


You were using a design patent to illustrate a trade dress argument. That tells me that you don't know what you're talking about. Two different things.
 
2014-05-06 11:34:58 AM  

Publikwerks: Flint Ironstag: Publikwerks: RexTalionis: Publikwerks: The touch interface. Previous to iPhone 1, this is how you used a smart phone:
tecnologiasmoviles.com

[upload.wikimedia.org image 424x600]

LG Prada, announced in December 2006 and released in May 2007. First phone with a capacitive touchscreen interface.

Now, I'm not saying that Apple copied LG or stole their design. The timeline of development for the LG Prada and the iPhone clearly overlaps. But to say that your resistive touch interface is the only way people used touchscreens prior to the iPhone is wrong.

First off, I don't have a "resistive touch interface".

Secondly - I'm not saying that a resistive touch interface was the innovation.  iOS was.They brought everything together in an attractive package that worked well.

You said "Prior to the iPhone every other phone needed a stylus". Which was wrong.

Fair enough. However, it doesn't change the validity of my argument that the iPhone changed the perception of what a smartphone should be


But they didn't invent the touchscreen, and they didn't invent multi-touch. Yet they accuse others of stealing those "innovations" from them.

/Not disputing that marketing wise the iPhone had a huge impact. Just that they are easily as guilty of stealing others ideas as others are of 'stealing' from them.
 
2014-05-06 11:38:15 AM  

RexTalionis: BullBearMS: RexTalionis: You have no idea what you're talking about.

Are you still pretending to have a law degree?

Jury: Samsung diluted Apple's trade dress for the iPhone

You were using a design patent to illustrate a trade dress argument. That tells me that you don't know what you're talking about. Two different things.


Suuuure you were.

That's why you never mentioned the image in question once.

When you dig yourself into a hole, "counselor", stop digging.
 
2014-05-06 11:40:11 AM  

RickyWilliams'sBong: nulluspixiusdemonica: Disagree as to whether the iPhone was innovative anything other than marketing.

As to whether we're better off? No. We aren't. As consumers, we're losing because innovation is being buried in walled gardens and litigation.

Sod that tripe.

And sod every single fabricator out there for engaging in it.

Anybody who thinks the iPhone didn't radically change the smartphone market has either works for BlackBerry or worked for Palm.

Pick up an iPhone, then go pick up an old Treo.  If you don't think we're better off, you're an idiot.


People forget how basic the first iPhone was. Even the app store didn't come until later. The Prada, among others, proves the whole industry was heading quickly in that direction. It had touchscreen, downloadable apps, document viewing software, make your own ringtones etc.
Without Apple we'd still have smartphones today. Probably not as far along as we are, but then if it wasn't for Android, Samsung and HTC we wouldn't be where we are today either. Apple have copied many things from them and driven Apple to improve the iPhone. They're lagging behind the curve now but they're still driving competition.
 
2014-05-06 11:40:22 AM  

RickyWilliams'sBong:  If you don't think we're better off, you're an idiot.


I'm an idiot.

But I'm an idiot waiting with bated breath to hear all about these magical innovations...
 
2014-05-06 11:40:56 AM  

Flint Ironstag: But they didn't invent the touchscreen, and they didn't invent multi-touch. Yet they accuse others of stealing those "innovations" from them.


No They bought the company that did patent multi-touch.

Just as Google bought the company that made Android.
 
2014-05-06 11:41:19 AM  

BullBearMS: RexTalionis: BullBearMS: RexTalionis: You have no idea what you're talking about.

Are you still pretending to have a law degree?

Jury: Samsung diluted Apple's trade dress for the iPhone

You were using a design patent to illustrate a trade dress argument. That tells me that you don't know what you're talking about. Two different things.

Suuuure you were.

That's why you never mentioned the image in question once.

When you dig yourself into a hole, "counselor", stop digging.


Are you sure? Because I recall this part of my comment:

RexTalionis: Design patents (the picture you included) is a patent on the ornamental elements of a device or product that is protectable for 14 years (note the design patent for the Coca-Cola bottle expired in 1951).

 
2014-05-06 11:41:39 AM  

BullBearMS: RexTalionis: BullBearMS: RexTalionis: You have no idea what you're talking about.

Are you still pretending to have a law degree?

Jury: Samsung diluted Apple's trade dress for the iPhone

You were using a design patent to illustrate a trade dress argument. That tells me that you don't know what you're talking about. Two different things.

Suuuure you were.

That's why you never mentioned the image in question once.

When you dig yourself into a hole, "counselor", stop digging.


You mean except where he said "Design patents (the picture you included)?
 
2014-05-06 11:43:39 AM  

RexTalionis: BullBearMS: RexTalionis: BullBearMS: RexTalionis: You have no idea what you're talking about.

Are you still pretending to have a law degree?

Jury: Samsung diluted Apple's trade dress for the iPhone

You were using a design patent to illustrate a trade dress argument. That tells me that you don't know what you're talking about. Two different things.

Suuuure you were.

That's why you never mentioned the image in question once.

When you dig yourself into a hole, "counselor", stop digging.

Are you sure? Because I recall this part of my comment:

RexTalionis: Design patents (the picture you included) is a patent on the ornamental elements of a device or product that is protectable for 14 years (note the design patent for the Coca-Cola bottle expired in 1951).


Maybe you are a lawyer. You're certainly petty enough.
 
2014-05-06 11:43:56 AM  

BullBearMS: Flint Ironstag: But they didn't invent the touchscreen, and they didn't invent multi-touch. Yet they accuse others of stealing those "innovations" from them.

No They bought the company that did patent multi-touch.

Just as Google bought the company that made Android.


But even those patents should never have been granted IMHO. Prior art, such as the video from 1984 I posted above, clearly shows pinch to zoom thirty years ago. Yet they still accuse others of "copying them".
 
2014-05-06 11:47:04 AM  
Here's something that Samsung copied from Foxxconn and innovated over.

China Labor Watch, released a report today detailing its investigations into eight factories in China, six of which were directly operated by Samsung, two of which made products for the electronics company but were run by suppliers.

Among the abuses found by China Labor Watch (CLW) at the factories were staff being "forced" to work 100 hours of overtime a month, unpaid hours and unsafe conditions.

The report says that workers at the eight factories also have to endure "standing for 11 to 12 hours while working, underage workers, severe age and gender discrimination, abuse of student and labor dispatch workers, a lack of worker safety, and verbal and physical abuse."

Not giving your employees a stool to sit on and physically beating them in factories you own yourself is quite an innovation.
 
2014-05-06 11:48:06 AM  

mediablitz: Publikwerks: See my above post. Apple didn't invent touch screens. They didn't invent alot of the stuff in the iphone, but they brought it together in a well though out manner that elevated the hardware.

But you'll put anyone who disagrees with you about Apple innovation on ignore.

So... you are putting yourself on ignore?

F*cking drama queen it much? Over a phone?


No, I ignore people who cannot discuss this like adults. That doesn't make me a drama queen. I just realized that certain subjects(Religion, the Confederate flag, Obama, The ACA,ect...), people can go overbaord. And other people feed into that by responding and validating such behavior. I do not.
 
2014-05-06 11:50:31 AM  

BullBearMS: Not giving your employees a stool to sit on and physically beating them in factories you own yourself is quite an innovation.


Nike did it first!

Consumers don't care. They especially don't want to know.
 
Displayed 50 of 90 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report