Perhaps, they didn't, its pretty easy to conclude that though. To say Samsung couldn't have designed a phone based on apple's inquiries about touch screen size, processor etc, a year before Apple introduced the iPhone, I think is a little disingenuous, could be right though, I dont think anyone will ever really know.

My point though was that people often, quite often say, that it was Apple who copied Samsung, and my 1st is that after the iPhone launched Samsung pretty much cloned the iphone, the F700 was unrefined had huge bezel lines, no definable dock, it looked like an old Palm Pilot. But after the iPhone, Samsung suddenly had square bordered icons, a "dock" like the iphone, they moved their branding, created larger space and used a chrome finish.

Apples argument is Samsung copy-catted them. Whether it's true or not, logical progression to the Galaxy or not from the F700 or not, all of Samsungs phones AFTER the launch of the iPhone closely resemble iPhones.

The fact that you can even patent something like that.

People borrow shit all the time, apple is so innovative yet when it came to a notification center they ripped the same pulldown menu other phones have been using for years, who cares?

But that's the only thing that looks similar to iphone on the galaxy. In fact all those screenshots people like to post are actually from the app launcher, which looks almost the same on just about every Android phone. The only thing that Samsung did was put that bar at the bottom of their launcher (which is stupid since it's unnecessary) and use backgrounds on their pre-installed app (which is even stupider since they clearly did it to copy the ios look)

Since there is "a hell of a lot more" to the UI, you pretty much argued against Apple's case. If they are really saying Samsung copied them because their launcher looks like ios, I don't see how the argument can even continue... but it is because of the (what just about everyone says is fucked up) US patent system.

Unless the screenshots you're using have nothing to do with the arguments, in which case, what is the point of using them?

^ It's not just about the look but about how things operate (like overscroll bounce or data tapping, for example). Apple has patents on dozens of "features" that individually don't seem that important, but as a whole have a significant impact on the experience.

As to the screenshots - I put them up as a joke just to show some of the stupid things people post online. Those before and after pictures are useless as you can come up with any combination of shots to support whatever side you want.


I don't think there's anything seriously wrong with the US patent system. Like any system, it isn't perfect, but it functions quite well most of the time. I'm all for IP and protecting it, and come down hard on people who download music, TV/movies or games/software. That automatically makes me very unpopular online since most people see nothing wrong with "stealing" other people's work. And since most people see no problem with stealing digital IP it makes sense they don't agree that patents should be handed out for things they think are "trivial" or "obvious". Hindsight is 20:20 - everything is obvious after you've seen it.

Documents show Samsung fixated on a 'Beat Apple' strategy, but did it cross the line? | The Verge

Lastest headline link... and a better pic..

Seriously, if anyone still believes that Samsung didn't at the very least, Borrow HEAVILY from Apple from day 1 of the iPhone and iPad launches, well, I tip my hat to you, your reality must be a fun place to live in..





http://f.cl.ly/items/3p391n2e2W1B130m0x3o/samapp.png