If anyone thinks a huge company is 'safe' then check out the fortunes of Nokia over the past couple of decades. A classic example of a company that rested on its laurels .....

15 years ago they had a huge market share in anything mobile .... where are they now ? back to a niche product.

Ditto.


Google has entered the fray... Why do you think it bought Motorola Mobility? Tonnes of patents...

Motorola Mobility has jumped into the lawsuit action... and the deal with Google means Google has to approve things like that, so Google is I think concerned.



Apple may not have the mobile market share of Android, but revenues are going up and up.

As for the tablet market... Android gaining market share? Hardly. The iPad still totally dominates the market (which is much more like the MP3 player market than the mobile market). None of the high profile non-Apple tablets have been what you could call successful... except for the Kindle Fire, which although Android isn't really "proper" Android.

Just because Android dominates the smartphone market does not in any way mean that it will come to dominate the tablet market. I think Apple will have it sewn up for quite some time yet.

The GS II came out about 6 months before the 4S btw.

Says more about apple customers than Apple.


Wrong....This story says otherwise, I can also provide plenty more links, but this should suffice.


My post was referring to the future, not the present. Looking at current market trends its safe to say Android will have a larger market share than iOS in the near future.


No it doesnt, but looking at the tablet market trends, says Android will. I would hazard a guess, that by the end of 2014/early 2015 Android will have the more market share than iOS.


Thanks for correcting me regarding the release date....glad we agree that the 4s is an inferior device to the SGS2.

I think Apple is right, the other brands need to follow their own course rather than Apple clones with an updated feature here and there...

This says a lot.
http://www.likecool.com/Gear/Pic/Cel...Before-Now.jpg

Not really...All it says is someone created an image from a collection of phones that look similar and labelled them "Now" in order to make their point.

Do me a favour!

Do you honestly think Apple would Photoshop images when in court the evidence is likely to be an actual example of each product? Apples lawyer will bring an iPad and Samsung bring a Galaxy and they hold them side by side?

Get real dude!

Apple is seen very much as the "bad <cough> apple" in the IT sector here but that doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.

There has been a history of claims and counterclaims regarding patent infringement through out the history of the industrial and technological age. This will continue unless there is an overhaul of patent legislation.

Ignore the 'moral' aspect of Apple suing Samsung for a moment and look instead upon one of the patents being disputed.

http://www.google.com/patents/US5946647

This is the patent application that Apple introduced to enable a product to (amongst other things) identify phone numbers in a message and to hyperlink this to the phones dialer. The patent was filled 16 years ago and granted 13 years ago. This patent was pending or in force long before any phone manufactuer used it. Why should Apple not protect that research and the time and money spent "inventing" the idea?

Now there is an arguement that all patents should available to all manufacturers pending a reasonable licence. This licence fee should be set so as not to price competitors out of the market but at the same time, to enable the holders of a patent to recoup their investment. I'm all for this argument, however, some manufacturers are not playing ball even when international bodies say they must.

Take Motorola for example.

http://articles.law360.s3.amazonaws....doc_num-93.pdf

They hold the patents for much of the 3G technology. The international body which oversees wireless technology recognises a number of these patents as essential for the provison of a 3G service. As such, Motorola must licence their essential patents on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms to anyone who requests a license. However, when Apple purchased 3G chips from a third party, Motorola instantly removed the licence from the third party and then took Apple to court for infringement. That went totally against the terms of FRAND. Motorola then tried to re-licence the technology to Apple on different terms than any competitors, again, outside the terms of FRAND.

Many companies seem frightend of each other and will place legal barriers in their way to restrict business. That is wrong and I'm sure Apple are no better or no worse in that respect. But on the face of it, Apple do appear to have a valid patent (as above) that they have a right to protect. So long as they licence that on reasonable terms then I have no problem with them enforcing that patent. After all patents were introduced to encorage and protect inovation not to stiffile it. And perhaps thats something that ALL manufacturers should remember

they all look different to me & would be more different if ones on right were switched on ... next...

they did it with ipad vs galaxy tab --- laughable poor attempt it was too

Not really they are iconic popular phones of the past v's now..
The point is i cannot remember phones looking like iPhones until the iPhone came out.

Remember S.E., Palm etc were first to market with touch screens but they looked way different i.e. Treo, R380, 7710 etc.

NOW they look mostly all the same.... this is similar to high end laptops ie MacBook Air & most tablets look similar i.e. iPad of which there was no real market till they started with the iPad.

The blame is with the Apple followers not Apple. Although they themselves i feel could innovate more but to be honest the market just isn't pushing them hard enough.

Where has the out of the box thinking gone? It's not because Apple is protecting itself its because everyone is so focused on trying to be like them.

Everyone involved in that court got to handle both products, judge included..... They even got confused which was which if i remember rightly.

It just seems to me that black is the new silver. If you have a large touch screen dominating a device, there's not much else you can do except maybe vajazzle the bevel

Perhaps I used the wrong word then. I am always wary about authorised biographies and reading an interview with the author, he does admit that many who came into contact with him left in a state of awe including the author, Perhaps I am reading a slanted review and this has prejudiced my decision to read it.

They certainly did. It was plain to everyone that Apple used doctored images even if malicious intent wasn't there (likely story) and that the image was of a pre production Tab 10.1 (huh) however this was part of submitted documentation pre trial and therefore not real physical examples.

The 10.1 has a different aspect ratio to the iPad so there is no excuse for mixing them up at all unless Apple managed to wangle a court room full of luddites.

They also like to use photos of the open Samsung i9000 app draw as evidence that it has stolen look and feel. The two phones are poles apart.

Right, so who did then?

Did it do it by itself?

You would....

Sadly many Apple users really believe that the iPhone was the first to be an oblong touchscreen phone using a matrix of icons.

Actually the LG Prada was announced prior to the iPhone and it is generally considered that Apple ripped off the LG design completely.

Google LG Prada and see what you think .....

So ...

Were Apple the first to create an mp3 player ? no
Were Apple the first to create an oblong phone ? no
Were Apple the first to use touchscreen ? no
Were Apple the first to introduce an App Store ? no
Were Apple the first to use icons laid out in a neat matrix ? no
Were Apple the first to enable video conferencing ? no
Were Apple the first to use Cloud storage ? no
Were Apple the first to use voice commands ? no

Really .... what do Apple fans believe that has been ripped off from Apple ???

Do Apple invent ? no ... they market ! and to their credit they are VERY good at it !

But all this stuff about Android ripping off from Apple is just silly. You could easily switch it round and say that Android was the first to:
- Use cloud storage
- Use voice control
- Use pull down notifications

etc etc.

You remember wrongly.

No one did. The judge amusingly thought they looked similar but later was thrown out.

Really? I've read the link but do you honestly think Apples very expensive lawyers said 'Photoshop! That'll do it' and Apples Patent Dept said 'Yeah, good plan no-one will ever notice!'.

This was to get the initial injuction. So no devices were presented.


That is total rubbish. The samsung galaxy tab 10.1 has the the word "SAMSUNG" on the front of the device. That alone would stop anyone from getting confused.

Do please remember that the first full touch screen device was made by LG. Not apple. Apple copied that design along with pinching the name iPhone from Cisco.

Apple are not blameless in this whole thing. They are as guilty as anyone else if not more guilty.

Or is it a non story and nothing more than internet folklore?

About the 3G patent. You 'forgot' to mention that Apple are refusing to pay since they first started using it. They are only willing to pay from a certain date.

And if any of those functions were patented then Apple would have had to pay a licence fee. Just like other companies should pay a licence fee for any technology they use where Apple holds the patent.

Interestingly Apple holds around 1000 mobile related patents to Samsungs 12,000. So it is probably true that they are a better marketer than inventor. But, they still have the right to protect the patents that they down own, just like every other manufacturer.

Thats not how it works. The patent holder can refuse to license the patent to you, in which case you cant use it. The patents covered under FRAND are different though....they have to be licensed.