# Apple vs Samsung (or Google/Android)



## Moonbat (Aug 30, 2012)

This thread might have to be moved to world Affairs, but...

What do people think about the recent Apple/Samsung court decision.

If you want to knwo what I'm talking about click here.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19388633

There were actually quite a few articles on the Beeb website about this, I'm sure you can find plenty elsewhere.

For the overall story I think it is a bad thing that Apple are managing to sucessfully sue Samsung over, what seems to me, to be barely patentable aspects of modern smart phones. I have to admit that I am and have always been a bit anti-Apple.

I'm not sure why, I just came down on the Microsoft side of the fence years ago and I don't like the way that Apple have agressively protected things over the years, to try to patent a rectangle with rounded corners is ridiculous, but they have also patented the lower case i and the word pod. 

I'm not happy, though it wont actually affect me as the ruling is for the US only, that Samsung may be forced to withdraw models from the market, are any of you guys likely to be affected?

Also I think that this case, which has almost always come down equally on both sides in all other nations that it was brought to court in, has sided with the American company in an American court.
From my understanding (from a Samsung employee) Apple have stolen plenty of their ideas too, and that most mobile phone manufacturers have either stolen/borrowed from Apple or had their ideas stolen/borrowed by Apple.

The reason Apple wont take on Google is because they own Motorola and Motorola holds the patents to many of the basic mobile phone innovations that could (if Google Sued Apple) force Apple to take all the phone stuff out of their i-phone.

Anyhoo, what do people think of this, are you for Apple and think they have every right to defend their intellectual property (being things like a rectangle with rounded corners!!) or should they relax their litigation in favour of innovation (some would argue they are the most innovative company of recent decades (I wouldn't)).
alot of articles are saying that the patent laws are the problem and the big companies are only using them in a way that is being allowed.


----------



## Kylara (Aug 30, 2012)

Since google have taken over Motorola I think they have redone lawsuits over the many patent violations Apple have made on Motorola tech. 

I am a firm Apple hater, and this really is stupid...what annoys me even more is how there are more Android OS users than there are iOS users and yet apps are always geared towards iOS more, even though it is a harder OS to write for...mainly I think because Apple will complain more, and people have this weird idea that everyone has an Apple product. I for one have never and will never own anything by Apple, at all. Design over functionality is not the way forward.


----------



## alchemist (Aug 30, 2012)

For some bizarre reason, this debate always provokes strong opinions. People either hate or love Apple.
I've never had any Apple products, but the almost cultish devotion some people have for them always turned me off, as well as how difficult they made it for Windows users to use iTunes -- I know it's easier now, but still those emotions linger. 
So, go Team Samsung!

(Disclaimer: I love my Samsung Galaxy Mini phone)


----------



## Brian G Turner (Aug 30, 2012)

Apple have always been very aggressive on the legal side, but Google has always been happy to "steal now, ask questions later". 

I have an iPad and a Galaxy Tab, and find Android a bit of a mess, really. 

When Apple upgrades iOS, it helps users. When a new version of Android is released, existing users get left behind.

Apple also make an effort to vet apps - Google Play is full of malware. Kind of shows the different attitudes of both companies to users.


----------



## Venusian Broon (Aug 30, 2012)

However the other side about Apple, IB, is that it is tryannical in it's efforts to control it's customers (or revenue generating apps I'm sure they think of the public). Yes I dislike Apple and the religious mania that their core users demonstrate* but if people like it fair enough **, but I do think there's a worrrying tendency towards Big Brother behavour, control and surveillance from this company. I just don't want to be on their radar. 

To be fair both Google and Facebook are similar, or at least on similar paths ***

So now I too oddly feel much more comfortable in the 'wild west' that is Microsoft PC platform and to a similiar degree Android. I'll accept the risk of malware, viruses and the rest - haven't had anything happen to me in over 20 years of high volume use of a huge number of different PCs/laptops and different networks - (touch wood). 

Plus also Apple have always lagged in gaming 


* i.e. the writer of the article on the Guardian website that stated that when he heard Steve jobs died he felt it was the right thing to do to go to an apple store and buy something. 

** If they want to pay an extortionate extra amount of cash for 'brand' and because everyone else has one to feel good, fair enough I say. I'm not falling for it though 

*** Surely, surely Facebook is CIA invention for monitoring people that has succeeded beyond their wildest dreams...


----------



## Brian G Turner (Aug 30, 2012)

Oh, Google has control and surveillance without peer.

Apple has a walled garden, but they don't appear to use their customer data for anything.

Google, on the other hand, is unparallelled in its data collection . They provided Gmail for free, Android for free, because they wanted to hoover up as much user data as possible. They set up Google Plus so they could correlate that with personalisation. 

Apple is the world's largest media company. Google is the world's largest advertising company.


----------



## Kylara (Aug 31, 2012)

http://xkcd.com/792/


----------



## billhafan (Aug 31, 2012)

Interesting take earlier in the thread to pick apple over microsoft - from an operating system point of view, fully understandable, but owning a high-priced iPad(aesthetically pleasing as they are), paying through the nose for just 64gb memory, no usb support, and unrealistic promises of bluetooth external drives usability, makes me wonder if I've missed the point using a netbook instead: win7 - stable (at last), Cost -less than half of an iPad, Memory-300gb, usb ports 3, HDMI out - 1, bluetooth - camera, mike, same size screen, longer battery life ...

Hmm - used the above to equate buying an iphone ... iphone is certainly desireable, but bought an android and I'm delighted.

A shame Apple can't let the users decide - litigation to do-over a competitor will turn many against Apple, I believe. Great dislike by many of MSoft for their attitude and monopoly over the years has certainly promoted open-source software, and is the saviour of many, including me. Could see Apple alienating many in the same way.


----------



## Venusian Broon (Aug 31, 2012)

I said:


> Apple has a walled garden, but they don't appear to use their customer data for anything.


 
I'd be very very surprised if they don't do anything with their customer data at all - it's gold to be sold to third parties and be exploited by the company itself - but to be fair to Apple, I'm sure everyone else will be doing stuff with the data they have to one degree or another. (I believe it's in Apple user license agreement that they share such data with 'Partners and Licensees') 

I think my main objection is the walled garden aspect - if I don't want one bit of the whole I can't put in a substitute. I should have the freedom to choose (and perhaps make a mistake, buy hey it's my mistake). Hence I prefer a more open platform. 


However there are weird things in the Apple contracts (thanks Cracked.com). For example if you accept the terms for iTunes then you've accepted that you've allowed Apple to geotrack you using the built-in GPS of your iPhone. And even if you're savvy enough to switch this off, it has been shown that they still collect the data anyway (but using other means). Also the terms do not specify devices, so if you use i-tunes on any other platform they are also allowed to gather info on your location as well. 


Now at first sight this may seem relatively minor, but it's a bit Orwellian and I find it disconcerting. Taking it further by going down this route - what if this system is hacked and this data is used by undesirables and criminals?

Yes, Google is probably doing _exactly_ the same. I try to avoid them as much as possible too


----------



## Culhwch (Sep 1, 2012)

billhafan said:


> Hmm - used the above to equate buying an iphone ... iphone is certainly desireable, but bought an android and I'm delighted.



Can't say I've ever thought the iPhone was desirable, but this put me in mind of this:






Perhaps Apple just didn't take the joke very well...


----------



## Ursa major (Sep 1, 2012)

Venusian Broon said:


> ...but I do think there's a worrrying tendency towards Big Brother behavour, control and surveillance from this company


This reminds me, though not in a good way, of "That Ad", the 1984 one shown first during the Super Bowl XVIII: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8​


----------



## Moonbat (Sep 3, 2012)

Bruce Willis is worried that, upon his death, his exstensive i-tunes library will not be passed to his children but rather the owenrship will revert to Apple. I think this is an area that Apple seem to be too strict upon. It seems that the songs you have bought from i-tunes do not actually belong to you (your copy of them anyway) and so they cannot be passed onto loved ones after your death. Bruce has 'many many ipods' so he is trying to ensure his children will inherit them without Apple reclaiming them.

We are currently looking to purchase some kind of music system that will play our mp3s but I am reluctant to get an ipod, although most systems that have docking stations work with ipods rather than generic mp3 players I have my music as mp3 and not through i-tunes. We have had problems trying to copy songs from sonia's laptop (i-tunes) to my PC for us to play through our TV as some of the i-tunes songs have a password on and others don't work in the mp3 format. It seems silly really. I know that technically when we buy a CD we don't own the songs in any other format and that it is illegal to rip them off the CD into MP3s, but we buy most our music in CD format (I have only bought 1 album as an MP3 - Gorillaz Plastic Beach) but I then also bought it as a CD to play in the car (rather than burn the mp3s into a CD format) it can be frustrating and Apple's walled garden policy doesn't help things.


----------



## Abernovo (Sep 3, 2012)

Moonbat, I keep an 8BG flash drive for music. My stereo has a USB inlet. Some of the 'stick' mp3 players (little more than flash drives with added software to organise and play music) also work.

I must admit I've never been that tempted by Apple. The products seemed expensive for little increase on other similar options from different manufacturers. I should also say that they lost me with their adverts years ago, when they told me that I was uncool, because I didn't use a Mac. I didn't, still don't, need a flashy bells-and-whistles computer and my PC did everything I needed it to. They gave me the impression of image over substance, which created a negative connection from the start.


----------



## Darth Angelus (Sep 14, 2012)

I don't have any particular opinion on the legal issue. Why would I, really? I am not a jurist, and I suspect most others with strong opinions on the matter are not, either.
However, I guess if Apple wins, they probably have some kind of case to take to court.
Anyway, I heard from a guy in a phone store that companies in this business sue each other left and right, and that Samsung sued another company, too.



Kylara said:


> I am a firm Apple hater, and this really is stupid...*what annoys me even more is how there are more Android OS users than there are iOS users and yet apps are always geared towards iOS more, even though it is a harder OS to write for...mainly I think because Apple will complain more, and people have this weird idea that everyone has an Apple product.* I for one have never and will never own anything by Apple, at all. Design over functionality is not the way forward.


Or maybe, just maybe, it is that users of Apple products are willing to actually pay for their apps. That is the main motivation I have heard and read, anyway. I have heard from reliable people knowing their stuff (someone running an app developer's course) that iOS is the system where the money is.
Why should third party developers go for Android first, then? It would be a bad business strategy, and they aren't charity workers. The majority has more power than the money in a market economy since...never.
Really, I am not saying Apple is all that nice a company. However, if Android users want to see the party that is responsible for iOS being prioritized, they need only bring a mirror. This is not personal. It is just that I have a certain dislike for people laying blame on others. You get what you pay for, and the users of iOS have proven more willing to open up their wallets.

Then again, the whole piracy movement (or whatever you call people who want to download copyrighted material without paying the owner/creator/developer of the intellectual property). How new intellectual property is to be financed in their ideal world, I have yet to see a working model for. Yet, I am sure there would be whining from these very same people, seeing movie companies shutting down, musicians having to look for other work and you name it. It would be unacceptable that much less would be available to download for free, even though it would be the inevitable result of a policy not protecting intellectual property.

Yes, I guess there could be some justified case for accusing Apple of being greedy, but some people do think things can be a bit more free than is e case, especially if it is not a physical object. And this demographic is overrepresented as users of one particular mobile operating system, and that is not iOS.

http://techpinions.com/android-v-ios-part-5-android-is-a-two-legged-stool/9596
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/appsblog/2012/jun/10/apple-developer-wwdc-schmidt-android


----------



## Kylara (Sep 18, 2012)

Android apps do have to paid for, true there are some freebies, but there are freebies in the iStore thingamy whatsit. My bf's company has just demanded that he make and app for iOS and in order to do this, they are having to buy a top of the range Apple laptop with all the latest software and stuff on it, and he will have to reload an "iOS Friendly" version of Linux. We both dislike Apple's design over function style and think it is hilarious that in order to even look at making a single app, they will have to shell out for all this new tech because you _cannot _make an iOS app on anythong other than an Apple product. 

What I can't understand is why people are still willingly buying into a product that is so closed from all other OSs and is still DRM encoded, it is just insane.

Plenty of people pay for Android apps, but the average Android user is less likely to complain openly and strongly enough about not being supported than an Apple user, they hope that eventually Android apps will be released, or, they will make their own and put it on the Android Market (now for some reason called the "Play store"). Every other phone uses Android. Only Apple uses iOS and it isn't even a very good OS. 

Look at the Lenovo ThinkPad Tablet I have, and compare it to and Apple iPad...the iPad looks like a child's plaything rather than a useful business tool, but Lenovo are an old company, that work well and are reliable and enduring. But hardly anyone knows who they are. And that is one of the main reasons I think people are purchasing Apple products. Apple are dominating people's minds so much that people don't even know that there are other, better options out there, or that Apple isn't actually that original...

Apple is easier to buy stuff from, if you have an iTunes account (I am really hating putting a stupid little i before all their words...) and Android people don't have that ease of access. But again if you get a new device, you have to rebuy all Apple apps. Android is an open platform which is great. Apple isn't. For Apple users there is no other option than their iStore or whatever it is, for Android, there is a much much wider choice...

That first article ends with "The combination of great hardware, great operating system and a great  application ecosystem makes iOS THE premier smartphone platform of our  times. The profit numbers prove it". Now that is a horrific way to determine the 'best'. Profit is silly, Apple are overpriced so will have bigger profit anyway, but are they saying Apple's profit are better than Samsungs? or Sony Mobile's? Or all Android mobile systems? 
Also Betamax was significantly superior to VHS but VHS still won that battle. Profit does not indicate 'better'. is an IKEA flat pack desk unit 'better' than a more expensive hand crafted by a carpenter made to fit your exact dimensions required desk because IKEA sell more of them? No. The hand crafted desk is better. It suits perfectly what you want it to do and costs more, but they sell less of them and so have a much smaller profit than IKEA's compromise skinny make do desk that sort of does what you want it to.

Anyway, rant over :wink:


----------



## Darth Angelus (Sep 18, 2012)

Kylara said:


> Android apps do have to paid for, true there are some freebies, but there are freebies in the iStore thingamy whatsit.


Yeah, but there are more free apps on Android. Still, that isn't the point. The point is that it is more difficult to get well paid on Android. I have read and heard this basically everywhere. I don't know how this manifests itself, but I have my suspicions. It may be piracy, and it may just be that expensive apps just don't sell much among the Android crowd, forcing developers to reduce the price.



Kylara said:


> My bf's company has just demanded that he make and app for iOS and in order to do this, they are having to buy a top of the range Apple laptop with all the latest software and stuff on it, and he will have to reload an "iOS Friendly" version of Linux. We both dislike Apple's design over function style and think it is hilarious that in order to even look at making a single app, they will have to shell out for all this new tech because you _cannot _make an iOS app on anythong other than an Apple product.


I know about Apple's policies, all right. They are big on combining their various product into a system. Yes, it is restrictive, but there are advantages to that, too. They can keep greater control over all parts of that system, which benefits them, but could also benefit the customer, due to less fragmentarion. Yes, they are probably doing it for their own benefit, mainly.
Still, if what I read and hear is true, the iOS community is probably paying for most of your bf's salary, so I think a few things can be endured.



Kylara said:


> What I can't understand is why people are still willingly buying into a product that is so closed from all other OSs and is still DRM encoded, it is just insane.


Because it is rather effortless to handle, from a user perspective. Some people don't like to be overloaded with tons of unnecessary crap on the desktop, and needless customization.
I am not really a technical noob. I have studied computer science and programming at university, but even I find it relieving not to have loads of things to set up.
Plus, the closed system means it is more closed to viruses and malware (although it exists, despite what Apple says). Considering there are LOADS of people without any particular technical interest at all, who just want to call, SMS, browse the web and send some mails, I strongly disagree with your opinion that it is hard to understand.



Kylara said:


> Plenty of people pay for Android apps, but the average Android user is less likely to complain openly and strongly enough about not being supported than an Apple user, they hope that eventually Android apps will be released, or, they will make their own and put it on the Android Market (now for some reason called the "Play store").


It doesn't matter if you think plenty of people pay for Android apps. The fact is that basically every source I have seen on the subject say they pay (much) less. This being the case, they have far less right to complain. The party that is relatively reluctant (statistially) to pay for a service must endure more shortcomings in that service.



Kylara said:


> Every other phone uses Android. Only Apple uses iOS and it isn't even a very good OS.


Oh, I very much beg to differ. It does what it sets out to do rather flawlessly, and it is intuitive. I realize the closed system isn't for everyone, but then just don't buy it. Why do you have to make such a fuss about it?



Kylara said:


> Look at the Lenovo ThinkPad Tablet I have, and compare it to and Apple iPad...the iPad looks like a child's plaything rather than a useful business tool, but Lenovo are an old company, that work well and are reliable and enduring. But hardly anyone knows who they are. And that is one of the main reasons I think people are purchasing Apple products. Apple are dominating people's minds so much that people don't even know that there are other, better options out there, or that Apple isn't actually that original...


Better for business, why? Apple's products's simplicity of usage, consistency and lack of malware means business risks less, and allowing them to focus on their main business goals.



Kylara said:


> Apple is easier to buy stuff from, if you have an iTunes account (I am really hating putting a stupid little i before all their words...) and Android people don't have that ease of access.


Exactly, and that is most important for a lot of (paying) people.



Kylara said:


> But again if you get a new device, you have to rebuy all Apple apps.


Last I checked, the iTunes account remembers apps you already purchased, so "rebuying" them is just a matter of downloading them to the new device.



Kylara said:


> Android is an open platform which is great. Apple isn't. For Apple users there is no other option than their iStore or whatever it is, for Android, there is a much much wider choice...


Do you know that App Store is still the largest collection of apps? Yes, larger than Google Play. And that is, despite more rigorous quality checks, that they actually work on devices. The rest of Android, I am not sure about, but I heard some manufacturers have their own stores.



Kylara said:


> That first article ends with "The combination of great hardware, great operating system and a great  application ecosystem makes iOS THE premier smartphone platform of our  times. The profit numbers prove it". Now that is a horrific way to determine the 'best'. Profit is silly, Apple are overpriced so will have bigger profit anyway, but are they saying Apple's profit are better than Samsungs? or Sony Mobile's? Or all Android mobile systems?


Yes, Apple makes by far the greatest share of the profit in the mobile market, if the numbers I have read are anywhere near correct. Not that it proves it better, no. It makes it most sustainable, in a market economy, though.



Kylara said:


> Also Betamax was significantly superior to VHS but VHS still won that battle. Profit does not indicate 'better'. is an IKEA flat pack desk unit 'better' than a more expensive hand crafted by a carpenter made to fit your exact dimensions required desk because IKEA sell more of them? No. The hand crafted desk is better. It suits perfectly what you want it to do and costs more, but they sell less of them and so have a much smaller profit than IKEA's compromise skinny make do desk that sort of does what you want it to.


Ok, now let's get things straight, here.
In your previous post, you complained that iOS gets prioritized over Android by app developers. It was in that context that I explained the profits are in that platform. Just ripping the whole profit argument out of that context is kind of fallacious, to be honest.
Moreover, you just pull a quote out of an entire article to discredit it.

The fact is that not all app developers are enthusiasts making things for the benefit of the community. Some are, but not all. There are companies, and create an app with expenses of developing it only to have it pirated and/or sold at lower than expected prices will make said companies lose interest in the platform, especially when another platform makes piracy awfully hard (or maybe impossible) and the users of that other platform can and will pay more. The choice to make apps for iOS first, Android second (if at all) is only natural for companies that actually make the apps to get paid. Small companies might not even survive if they make app for the platform where they will get paid less.
And anyway, profit isn't really all that silly, at least within the current economic system. It is what drives all companies in a market economy. Granted, people can get shortsighted by only looking at that, and I don't like people with an ultra-economic outlook on life, but the point was still that app making third party developers have been given more incentive to develop for iOS.
I am not saying Android will die. Not at all. It clearly has plenty of fans, and they may develop their own apps. However, its users may have to live with certain developers making their apps later (if ever) to that system.
Basically, an open vs. closed system is clearly a tradeoff, which is where I think we disagree. You seem to only want to see the good things of the open platform, ignoring any weaknesses it might have that might drive developers away, and therefore pin any problems you encounter that fundamentally has to do with your favourite system on something else, that has to do with the other system (Apple or its users complaining).



Kylara said:


> Anyway, rant over :wink:


Yeah, ok, cool.
Basically, if you prefer the open system, then fine, go for it. Why does it bother you so much that there is another system, though? It isn't like you have to buy it.

And frankly, if it is your bf's work to make an app for iOS, your rant comes off more than a little bit as biting the hand that feeds you. Do you resent the source of what possibly makes up a major part of of your bf's salary all that much?


----------



## Kylara (Sep 18, 2012)

Quick response, I'll reply better when I have more time.

My bf is a software/hardware/firmware/web developing engineer who makes stuff for some pretty awesome stuff. He also dislikes Apple and their iOS and was arguing for the company to make an Android app as well but got ignored/outvoted and now he will have to make a single app for Apple, but only after his company buys him a top of the range Apple computer plus software and all the Apple only accessories that are somewhat important to actually doing anything. After he has made this one app, he will have a computer to use that he hates and no reason for it. I used it as an example of the narrow mindedness Apple has in some areas. For design people (like my bf's brother) Apple is probably an easier thing to use if you don't know the good non iOS programmes and is a little more helpful on the design side, but anything on an Apple can only be shown on another Apple unless you go through a lot of hassle to get it to work on a non Apple device.

Anyway, more response later, I am very short on time atm...


----------



## Darth Angelus (Sep 18, 2012)

Kylara said:


> Quick response, I'll reply better when I have more time.


Fair enough.



Kylara said:


> My bf is a software/hardware/firmware/web developing engineer who makes stuff for some pretty awesome stuff. He also dislikes Apple and their iOS and was arguing for the company to make an Android app as well but got ignored/outvoted and now he will have to make a single app for Apple, but only after his company buys him a top of the range Apple computer plus software and all the Apple only accessories that are somewhat important to actually doing anything. After he has made this one app, he will have a computer to use that he hates and no reason for it. I used it as an example of the narrow mindedness Apple has in some areas. For design people (like my bf's brother) Apple is probably an easier thing to use if you don't know the good non iOS programmes and is a little more helpful on the design side, but anything on an Apple can only be shown on another Apple unless you go through a lot of hassle to get it to work on a non Apple device.


Ok, I can see how he might not enjoy that, but most if not all jobs entail doing stuff one doesn't want to do. It would be interesting to hear the arguments of those who decided to go for iOS only, however, even though I suspect I have a fair idea about the answer to that one, as outlined in my previous posts.



Kylara said:


> Anyway, more response later, I am very short on time atm...


Yeah, that is fine.


----------



## Lenny (Sep 18, 2012)

I've kept in touch with a fair few people (Computer Scientists) from University, and I know a fair few more still at University, who have built, or are building, iOS and Android apps (for themselves and as part of their work), and who have experience in both Java and Objective-C, and to a person, they all _hate_ Objective-C and writing for iOS. I'm trying my hardest to stay clear away from both, as the main complaints I hear are how bad the language is (coming from people who were forced to learn and use Java for three years - go figure), and how you're forced into Apple's ecosystem.

I'm an Android user, because I originally disliked the idea of being locked into Apple's ecosystem, and having to dance to their beat (and it still goes on - just look at the Lightning connector for the iPhone 5, for example. A good number of people who will be upgrading to the iPhone 5 from a previous model are going to have peripherals that now won't work unless they buy some proprietary adapter from Apple!). Now I find that iOS, and Apple's phones, are starting to look tired and boring, compared to what's being done with Android and Windows Phone 7 and 8. I also can't stand using any iDevice, because I feel limited by the interface - back and menu are far more intuitive than having to scream at the software to get something done because it's not obvious. Bad design is something that makes you think when you want to use it. Sure, argue all you want that good design breeds laziness in consumers, but it works a treat.

I'm also in the planning stages of the development of an Android app - half because I just want to try it out, half because it's something that I want to be able to do on my phone. The beauty of this app, if I ever finish it? I can stick the .apk on my website and anyone can download and install it, without having to go through Google (btw, the argument against Android not having as many apps as iOS, and thus not offering as wide a choice? Rubbish. There are multiple stores for apps on Android, as well as this possibility of installing it under your own steam. With iOS, you either go through Apple or jailbreak). If I want an app available on iOS, I need to cough up £100 to Apple and wait months for it to be approved.

---

Back to the original point of the thread, I think the final verdict was complete madness, but don't see it affecting Google in any way. The infringements in question were all part of Samsung's design (hardware, and their Touchwiz skin) and not a part of Android. If Apple does try and claim part of the Android interface infringes on their overly broad patents, then Google has the manpower to knock together a workaround within days and the infrastructure in place to get that update out to every Android handset.

What I find interesting in the aftermath of the verdict is that although the Galaxy Tab 10.1 was ruled not to infringe on the iPad design, the judge, Lucy Koh, cannot overturn the previous injunction against it and allow it back on shelves. Which again, is madness.

In the grander scheme of things, however, Apple are only winning in the US - they've sued Samsung in as many territories as possible, and nearly all of them that have come to a decision have ruled for Samsung (or at least against Apple). The only other decision that could be seen to favour Apple came in, I think, South Korea, but that court obviously thought the case was stupid and ruled to punish both companies.


----------



## Darth Angelus (Sep 19, 2012)

Yeah, I am not overly fond of Objective-C, either, I have to admit. It doesn't seem to be the smoothest operating system to write programs to. I haven't really gotten around to it myself yet, being too used to Java.

As for design, I think neither system's phones look very fantastic. The design of iPhone is indeed starting to look dated, although the changes to iPhone 5 helps with that a little bit. Still, consistency is part of Apple's policy.
The S3, on the other hand, comes off to me as a too large piece of plastic. This choice of material seems a bit too cheap for such a pricy phone. I don't really like Samsung's use of plastic on the back of their tablets, either.
But yes, being able to choose basically only one design on an Apple phone is a bit restrictive.

As for Android not having as wide a choice of apps as iOS, yes, without being too familiar with Android's ecosystem, I would say it probably is rubbish, today. The counterarguments you present do make sense. It may have been true once, though.
However, the similar argument that specific popular apps (with development costs for some company), may not come as fast (or at all) to Android, still holds. Again, difficulty of getting paid has already caused interest in the platform to slip, for such companies.
That was basically all their was to my first post in this thread. Kylara made a frustrated rant about iOS getting prioritized for certain apps (at least, that is how I understood it), but that particular choice is the one that makes the most sense from a business perspective.

In reality, the best bet is probably that both operating systems will live on, side by side. Not every war of standards in business end up with one being wiped out. A certain market may be split, and who knows, maybe a well made offensive by Microsoft to launch Windows Phone 8 (assisted by Android using Samsung, no less), will cut off a slice for that system, as well.


----------



## Lenny (Sep 21, 2012)

To back up something I said a couple of days ago:



Lenny said:


> In the grander scheme of things, however, Apple are only winning in the US - they've sued Samsung in as many territories as possible, and nearly all of them that have come to a decision have ruled for Samsung (or at least against Apple). The only other decision that could be seen to favour Apple came in, I think, South Korea, but that court obviously thought the case was stupid and ruled to punish both companies.



A court in Mannheim, Germany has just ruled that Samsung (and Motorola - although they recently lost a case in Germany over a bounce-back patent. However, this is in part of Motorola's custom skin, and can be easily bypassed by them implemented the stock Android glow) don't violate a touch event patent held by Apple, taking the same view that made Apple lose out in the UK and Netherlands: the patent is just too broad.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/21/...t-motorola-samsung-dont-violate-apple-patent/


----------



## DrMclony (Sep 22, 2012)

The reason apple persists in fraudulent patents on common sense interface items is that they have limited claim to the patents on their hardware. Perhaps if they designed and manufactured their own products, there would be a very different situation.

*gets into asbestos suit and hides behind a wall until the apple fans have left*


----------



## Gordian Knot (Sep 25, 2012)

No need to hide, and besides the asbestos suit won't do you any good at all against my death ray. Bwah-Hah-Hah-Hah!!!!

Ahem.

I am an Apple fan, and even I do not like the direction the company is going. They learned their lesson from Microsoft back in the day all too well. Then Microsoft was the Big, Bad Corporation. Sure they allowed their OS to be used on other machines, but they wrote their code so that Microsoft programs ran faster on Windows than other companies software. They kept the edge for themselves.

Now Apple is the Big, Bad Corp. in the voice and video peripherals market. They Got It. When you lock in the market people either play by your rules or they go elsewhere. Time will tell if this will hurt them more than help them, but up until now it doesn't seem to have hurt them much.

Microsoft, Google, Android & all the rest are trying to play catch up; some are doing better than others. But they all share the same dream. To be the proprietary device winner.

Which makes all of us losers, to my way of thinking. The more rigid the structure, the less freedom for the end user. This new frontier of phones, pads, portables, etc. is a huge step backward for end users. Unfortunately I do not see anyone of the Big Corps interested in going back to more open market devices.

And the worst is just coming along. The muchly vaunted Cloud. Talk about locking in the end user! Each companies Cloud is proprietary, which means if you buy onto Microsoft's Cloud, and at a later date wish to switch to the iCloud, it is going to be a b*tch of a problem. As I understand it information management on the various Clouds is completely incompatible with each other.

Welcome to the Brave New World!


----------



## billhafan (Sep 25, 2012)

Moonbat said:


> Bruce Willis is worried that, upon his death, his exstensive i-tunes library will not be passed to his children but rather the owenrship will revert to Apple. I think this is an area that Apple seem to be too strict upon. It seems that the songs you have bought from i-tunes do not actually belong to you (your copy of them anyway) and so they cannot be passed onto loved ones after your death. Bruce has 'many many ipods' so he is trying to ensure his children will inherit them without Apple reclaiming them.
> 
> We are currently looking to purchase some kind of music system that will play our mp3s but I am reluctant to get an ipod, although most systems that have docking stations work with ipods rather than generic mp3 players I have my music as mp3 and not through i-tunes. We have had problems trying to copy songs from sonia's laptop (i-tunes) to my PC for us to play through our TV as some of the i-tunes songs have a password on and others don't work in the mp3 format. It seems silly really. I know that technically when we buy a CD we don't own the songs in any other format and that it is illegal to rip them off the CD into MP3s, but we buy most our music in CD format (I have only bought 1 album as an MP3 - Gorillaz Plastic Beach) but I then also bought it as a CD to play in the car (rather than burn the mp3s into a CD format) it can be frustrating and Apple's walled garden policy doesn't help things.



For in your house, check out a sumvision cyclone micro 2+ on ebay - bought mine and never had a problem - plays everything, and I mean everything! Also has a surround sound output and HDMI up-scaling. Video and audio quality is A1, no video stalling or sync issues. I plug in an external 2.5" 500GB HD with audio and video on it. Straight forward, good remote, and cheap as chips.


----------



## Moonbat (Sep 25, 2012)

Hmm, not sure, as that will require a stereo system as well, which we don't currently have.
I'm actually torn between a squeezebox and a Sonos play:3.
I'm leaning towards the sonos, but I want to see one in real life before I buy, so I'll have to find a shop that does one soonish.
I will keep the cyclone in mind, and maybe check it out too.
I'm am amazed at how expensive these things go, some people must be mad to spend that much on speakers, I can honestly say I haven't ever noticed better sound with speakers that cost £1000 to those that cost £100, but maybe I'm just not enough of an audiophile. To be honest I think most of it is just audio w**king, but maybe I'm being harsh.


----------



## billhafan (Sep 25, 2012)

The Cyclone is under £30, and if you've got speakers on your TV, you've got a hi-fi  You can also connect it to any hifi in the future. I have 2 in my house, and travel with one for Hotels abroad etc. where it's worth it's weight in gold. Worth checking out, but the Sonos does look nice


----------



## Moonbat (Sep 26, 2012)

ah, we can already play CDs and Mp3s through our TV (mp3 through a USB connected External Hard drive), but it is in the other room.
We want to have a hifi in our lounge (which doesn't have a TV atm) so that we don't have to have the TV speakers blaring away in the other room if we want to listen to music whilst we play scrabble or entertain guests.


----------



## billhafan (Sep 26, 2012)

Makes sense  Good luck with the Sonos if you go down that route.


----------

