NZtechfreak: They've copied Apple because their tablet is also slim?

NZtechfreak: They've copied Apple because their tablet is also slim?

ArtooDetoo:

NZtechfreak: They've copied Apple because their tablet is also slim?

You'll find some people arguing that anything rectangular with rounded corners and a multi-touch glass display, icons representing applications and services, capable of playing music and watching video, connecting to the web and being portable is a copy of some Apple device or other.

Yet at the same time, having an engine, four wheels, seats, a steering wheel, doors and windows, brakes and accelerator pedals and the ability to get you and your passengers to the shops on public roads, oddly doesn't mean that their car is a copy of a Mercedes.

But then, some people will indulge in any mental gymnasics needed to justify their irrational hatred of competitors of their self-defining gadget of choice.

Not that anybody on Geekzone would be like that, of course.

tdgeek:

Never!

The pity with tech devices is that the hate of one company or the love of another is so weighted. How many times have I read Microsoft sux, or I won't buy an Apple as I hate Steve Jobs.

ArtooDetoo:

tdgeek:

Never!

The pity with tech devices is that the hate of one company or the love of another is so weighted. How many times have I read Microsoft sux, or I won't buy an Apple as I hate Steve Jobs.

You want examples of irrational hatred, just spend a couple of minutes at AppleInsider or MacDailyNews. There's surely no greater haters than rabid Apple fans. Not that you won't find irrational Apple haters, mind you, it's just that they don't seem to clump together like the 'hate all of Apple's competitors' crowd who seem to spend their waking hours looking for new targets to add to their hate lists.

One of the good things about this forum is how few flame wars Geekzone has. And long may it continue.

tdgeek:

NZtechfreak: They've copied Apple because their tablet is also slim?

Hee, I doubt it. From what i saw in that article and the previous one, its the look and feel. For example, WP7 is different from iOS, whereas the 10.1 is similar to the iPad look and feel. There was also an issue with the Galaxy which from first look, looks like an iPhone4 device and OS.  Ideally, Apple iOS has its look, a WP7 has its own look, so Samsung should have made a device that has its own look instead of imitating  someone else's look.

All manufactureres of phones and OS's will copy others ideas, thats evolution, but you need to keep a degree of seperation to keep your "new" idea different enough so you don't get pinged for plagiarism or patent infringment. To have it looking similar is a bit duff. Maybe they wanted to make it look similar and compete on price and configurability, rather than create their own idea.

Firstly, whatever Samsung did with their phones is irrelevant to a discussion concerning the Tab.

The Tab is very close to stock Honeycomb, which has a dramatically different feel and look than the iPad in terms of the UI. The fact that its close in form factor is irrelevant, since making a slim tablet is automatically going to be very close to Apple's device.

I simply fail to see the legitimacy of Apple' case, just as I fail to see the legitimacy of their patent trolling activities. 

tdgeek:
Really? Thats odd, although I've never been there.

athor: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10745546

However, a spokesperson for Samsung New Zealand said the company was shipping the tablet to local retailers this week, and it should be available in the coming days.