Explore Newsletters from ECT News Network » View Samples | Subscribe
Welcome Guest | Sign In
Digital River - Talk to the Experts
E-Commerce Times TechNewsWorld CRM Buyer LinuxInsider

MacNewsWorld Talkback

ECT News Community   »   MacNewsWorld Talkback   »   Re: Samsung Ought to Be Embarrassed and Ashamed

Re: Samsung Ought to Be Embarrassed and Ashamed
Posted by: Chris Maxcer 2011-08-18 05:18:10
See Full Story

Samsung used to be a consumer electronics brand that I appreciated and admired. I've owned several Samsung products over the years; in fact, I use one every day. I have a Samsung SyncMaster T240HD 24-inch monitor. It's a thing of beauty, actually, with a pleasing clear polycarbonate sort of frame with a touch of deep red layered beneath the clear plastic-like housing. I love it. The display is plenty sharp for me, quite adjustable, and best yet, this unit is also an HDTV and accepts all sorts of video input cables.

Is it Possible Not to Infringe?
Posted by: jadams123 2011-08-24 07:21:13 In reply to: Chris Maxcer
If Samsung have copied Apple's designs, it is a testament to how difficult it is to be unique in the 21st century, especially when we are talking about a rectangular box. From what I understand all hardware manufacturers are supposed to strive to have their equipment work on all platforms. Is that not the goal? Uniformity in software and hardware is what allow technology to more forward.

Is Samsung supposed to put wings on their pads to ensure they are not infringing on another patent. From where I am sitting, the only players that are making money are the lawyers who are making a killing at the expense of the consumer. I would love to know what percentage manufacturers build in for future legal expenses on their products. I am sure it is a considerable amount, considering the law business is known for outrageous pricing.

Samsung is known to copy
Posted by: casualsuede 2011-08-21 14:10:19 In reply to: Chris Maxcer
Samsung is known for copying. I worked for a competitor where they copied our design everytime we had a device (LG).

When we developed Chocolate, they came out with Ultra Edition. When we developed one of the first square QWERTY devices (Lotus), they came out with Gloss. When we developed one of the first side sliders (f9100 and Rumor), they followed quickly with Seek.

For the longest time, we thought someone was selling our secrets.

Samsung does copy off anyone and uses their size to crush the smaller competition. But if we are calling a them cheaters, then let's not let APPLE off the hook either. Their iPhone looked very suspiciously like our Prada phone which launched months before iPhone was announced.

It was so close that LG was thinking of suing, but never did.

You can get the story at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_(KE850)

"Copying the Creations"
Posted by: calvinc 2011-08-19 10:10:53 In reply to: Chris Maxcer
Speaking of copying creations, on your website, you say one of your favorite quotes is:

"Given that Apple had actually stolen the trademark that Cisco owned, and Apple actually had a product on the market, Cisco had an incredible amount of power in this negotiation. To have Apple walk in and pretty much just take it ... it speaks to the amazing skill that Steve Jobs has in doing stuff like this. I can't picture anybody who is negotiating a deal with Apple and isn't scared to death. It's one of those things where you sit back in awe of how Apple can pull these kinds of things off time and time again."

"Cultural thing"
Posted by: calvinc 2011-08-19 09:58:11 In reply to: Chris Maxcer
Was just reading your comments below and you said, "OK, then, what's the big deal? Maybe it's a cultural thing"

What are you trying insinuate there?

Global vs. U.S. Versions, Plus Muscle Cars
Posted by: CMaxcer 2011-08-18 19:08:57 In reply to: Chris Maxcer
So the “global” microsite for the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 has photos of the Tab _with_ the Samsung logo . . . but the U.S. microsite features the Tab _without_ the Samsung logo. What’s up with that choice? Seems like a conscious effort to make the Tab more iPad like on the iPad’s home turf. Why? No one removes their brand from their product without a heckuva lot of discussion on the matter -- and for a very good reason.

The global site:

The U.S. site:

OK, then, what’s the big deal? Maybe it’s a cultural thing. Take American auto makers . . . Chevrolet, Dodge, and Ford. All three make muscle cars -- the Camero, Challenger, and Mustang, respectively. All fit into the same basic class of car . . . and yet, all three are not only easily distinguishable, their manufacturers take pride and strive to make them distinguishable. Would any American auto manufacturer take a _flagship_ product and allow a unit to go into production that looks nearly identical to a competitor? No way. Will they create a car to compete on a class-of-car level? You bet. The Dodge Viper, though, while sharing similar sports-car angles, clearly looks to find differences from the Chevrolet Corvette.

I take this sensibility into the creation of new products. If Dodge created a car that was so close to the exact same color and shape that you couldn't distinguish the Viper from the Corvette with a glance, would the leaders of Dodge stand up and proclaim how gorgeous their creation was?


Yes, But ...
Posted by: Alfiejr 2011-08-18 11:39:36 In reply to: Chris Maxcer
yes, Samsung is blatantly copying Apple right now, and that's lame.

but i think it's just a passing phase. Samsung is also developing its own OS, Bada. and now that they have got the message from Google that Android, which is largely (not all) an iOS copy too, can't be relied on by other OEM's, i bet they will double down on Bada for future products and gradually let go of Android.

or maybe faster, if everyone's litigation brings Android down next year.

You should be ashamed
Posted by: calvinc 2011-08-18 10:14:05 In reply to: Chris Maxcer
"Sure, the default orientation of the Galaxy tablet is horizontal vs. the iPad's portrait use, but the full-frontal sheet of glass surrounded by an inch or so of black border all wrapped by a metal frame with four curving edges"

And because we have never seen this design before, right? I had no idea that Apple invented black borders and curving edges. Why doesn't Apple just sue every industry giant that has used that design template? Unless it's been done before...

This link below shows a video created in 1994. The Knight Ridder Tablet.


Apple used to be a consumer electronics brand that I appreciated and admired before they engaged in monopolistic maneuvers that thwart competition and have essentially taken Microsoft's mantle as the biggest destroyer of innovation and growth.

It's pathetic because you created your post with a provocative headline to generate more views without doing any research to back it up.
I'm not even inclined to call you a blogger. You're more like a 15 year old kid with a diary who happens to post his elementary musings online.

Great point, think it will come down to a sum-of-all-parts question
Posted by: CMaxcer 2011-08-18 08:43:22 In reply to: Chris Maxcer
The design of the original Samsung photo frame . . . that makes a very good point. I found a better photo of it in an engadget.com article dated March 9, 2006: http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/samsung-digital-picture-frame-stores-pics-movies-music . Needless to say, I’m much less irritated at Samsung, and I want to extend my apologies for the vitriolic comments.

Still, while basic design may have been created by Samsung first . . . and applied to the iPhone and iPad by Apple first (or even invented by someone else entirely, like some physical photo frame manufacturer) . . . it does’t really explain the Galaxy S’s similarities. Even more troubling to me is the lack of the iconic Samsung logo on the front of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1. I’ve seen one photo where it was there . . . but current web site pages show it missing: http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-tab/GT-P7510MAYXAB . That seems very un-Samsung like . . . and a very Apple-like move. Coincidence? Perhaps.

The 2006 photo frame gives Samsung a great defensible position even if they are currently intentionally taking cues from Apple’s successes, and at the same time, despite the other similarities in the frame, construction, borders, etc., makes it less likely that Apple could win such a dispute -- I think it will depend on the nuances of the design and if they all add up to something that more closely resembles an iPad than a Samsung picture frame. So this move, from an Apple perspective, may be more of a warning, a shot across Samsung’s bow to say, “Look, buddy, we know you’re doing this on purpose, so don’t push it.”

So, is Samsung copying elements of Apple’s trade dress as they apply to smart phones and tablets? Still seems pretty obvious to me. Maybe I’m wrong. Can Samsung defend itself based on its previous photo frame? I would hope so. Either way, I’d prefer to see Samsung put its logo on the front of its Galaxy Tab 10.1 . . . and go after the Android tablet market on the weight of its brand. Samsung can differentiate itself from the Android horde . . . if it wants to, but not as a more anonymous iPad clone.


Your point on logo is iffy at best.
Posted by: casualsuede 2011-08-21 14:17:06 In reply to: CMaxcer
It is all conjecture. Because Samsung decides to move their logo to the back of the device, they are suddenly copying Apple?

If they included the trademark Apple homekey button, I could see it, but the truth is that the Galaxy looks like a big brother of their 7 inch Galaxy Tab that has been selling for a while now.

Don't Want to be a Trool But LOL
Posted by: mtelesha 2011-08-18 06:11:27 In reply to: Chris Maxcer
Hi sorry for this but I spewed my tea onto my keyboard when I started loading the page. Really all that has happened with doctored images. (Size ratio change, a portrait photo shopped desktop and a silver edging on the Galaxy Tab)

My 1993 Motion Computing Tablet and I really laughed at the thought. I guess Apple truly can never make a mistake.

Also if anyone was going to make a tablet computer AKA a laptop without a keyboard how would you make it look? This is like trying to patent Mystery Novels in writing or icons and a mouse interface when Xerox invented it prior to Apple.

Thank you I really needed a laugh.

To Mr.Chris Maxcer
Posted by: macuser1 2011-08-18 05:43:18 In reply to: Chris Maxcer
Its really shameful that you support Apple in a way that can only be described as bias toward Samsung, your little speech about owning X electronics appliances is touching but not convincing, if you would have an inch of self respect and better memory you should know that apple is know for stealing everything they produce today, they even forged evidence that had to be used to convince a judge that Samsung "copied" the ipad design. Its even more shameful that you try to protect such pirates and that apple feels that they are the only company entitled to make tablets and accuse others of copying when they have done the same.

Please copy paste the link here and see the first Samsung photo frame that they produced in 2006: http://i567.photobucket.com/albums/ss117/Jon-Garrett/pfip.png

See for yourself who copied who and be more objective when distributing your Pro Apple news that only puts you to shame as it is even more suspicious that you have a kind of relation with the Apple company, you are a blatant copy of an apple employe, get a life and really try Samsung products if you can instead to lie about owning any!!

I completely agree.
Posted by: JM_66 2011-08-18 14:42:16 In reply to: macuser1
So many of Apple's designs existing in another companies product before Apple made them popular. And tablets are no exception. There patent is so broad and vague that products that existed 9 years ago would be in violation of it; long before Apple's product was available.
The whole idea is disgusting.
I believe in defending IP, but only REAL IP...not some made up BS to try and control any possible innovation. I really hope Apple loses, because it will be a sad direction for technology.
Jump to:
Which best describes what you think about requiring Covid-19 "vaccine passports?"
It will prompt more people to take the vaccine to help end the virus.
It will lessen restrictions and provide more freedom for individuals.
It is a violation of privacy and civil liberties.
It will lead to stigma and discrimination.
It will encourage counterfeits and other criminal activities.