| Author |
From iPhone to Galaxy Nexus - How is the Android experience compared to iOS? |
anonymuser
Joined: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2011-11-17 23:30:09, etaab wrote:
Apple enraged me in July'10 when they attempted to downplay and deny their antenna issues with the 4.
Genuine question - did you own an iPhone 4 at that time? We're you personally affected by those issues? If not, isn't it a little odd to be "enraged" by something you haven't actually experienced? Were you enraged by the offer of a full refund to anyone who *was* actually affected, or were you secretly more "enraged" at the fact that few took them up on that offer, and the phone went on to be a massive success?
They enraged me again when they got the Galaxy Tab banned across europe, which then only took place in Germany. Only now can Samsung sell their Android tab there now its been redesigned. They enraged me yet again several more times during this past 6 months with their continuous court battles. Some would argue its tit-for-tat and Samsung et al are all doing the same, but really Apple started the ball rolling and have filed the most legal complaints to get their competitors products banned or at least with lesser features.
What should really enrage anyone interested in technology is how blatantly companies like Samsung trade in knock-offs of other peoples designs and ideas. Before you protest at that, accept the fact that the ONLY reason Apple keep winning these suits, and successfully "banning" products, is because the various courts of law in various countries wholly accept that Samsung has violated these patents - and Samsung's tit for tat response has not had the same affect because they simply don't have a leg to stand on. If Apple's such an evil behemoth and the likes of Samsung are so great, then why don't they come up with something great on their own WITHOUT handing yet another court victory to Apple?
They enraged me again only last month with their pathetic 4S upgrade, or lack of. Same screen, same lack of features, same speech about how great their product is.
Again a bizarre choice of phrase about a product you evidently had no intention of buying even if the 4S had been designed by the gods themselves and welded out of Martian steel. What do you care? It adds a dual core processor, 1080p video and the best camera on any phone, but to you it's a pathetic upgrade to a phone you've no experience of interest in anyway. Big deal - what is there to be enraged about? Did you Apple stocks dip that day? I'm pretty sure they've bounced back now.
Siri ? its the same product as Vlingo but just developed a bit more. They talk like they invented the wheel !
Siri is the same product as, well, Siri, an iPhone app which predates Vlingo - but yeah, "developed a bit more". Which is a nice understated way to describe software that's much better than other software. Is it the invention of the wheel? No of course not, but it's the first time anything like this has been integrated so deeply into an OS or executed so well - one of the head guys at Google is on record as saying it's "not that useful" which is a perfectly valid point of view, time will tell how useful Apple's competitors think it is a year or two down the track when they traditionally start to catch up.
And now this news i posted, where Apple apparently could file suits against everyone who has location based services which literally applies to every software house and hardware manufacturer out there.
If you stopped to read and understand the article you'd know that Apple didnt create that patent themselves - it was already patented by another company. Meaning that other company already had the power to sue every other software and hardware manufacturer out there INCLUDING Apple, who obviously make ample use of location services in their products and would have been prime target for a suit. All Apple did was take the sensible step of protecting themselves by buying the patent outright, and upfront, meaning they can't be sued themselves. If Google or whoever are that worried about being sued, maybe they should have bought the patent.
| |
|
Miss UK
Joined: Jan 11, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
WoW im scared to step foot in here 
An "Apple" a day keeps the Doctor at Bay! |
Bonovox
Joined: Apr 13, 2008
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2011-11-18 00:13:56, Boinng wrote:
On 2011-11-17 23:30:09, etaab wrote:
Apple enraged me in July'10 when they attempted to downplay and deny their antenna issues with the 4.
Genuine question - did you own an iPhone 4 at that time? We're you personally affected by those issues? If not, isn't it a little odd to be "enraged" by something you haven't actually experienced? Were you enraged by the offer of a full refund to anyone who *was* actually affected, or were you secretly more "enraged" at the fact that few took them up on that offer, and the phone went on to be a massive success?
They enraged me again when they got the Galaxy Tab banned across europe, which then only took place in Germany. Only now can Samsung sell their Android tab there now its been redesigned. They enraged me yet again several more times during this past 6 months with their continuous court battles. Some would argue its tit-for-tat and Samsung et al are all doing the same, but really Apple started the ball rolling and have filed the most legal complaints to get their competitors products banned or at least with lesser features.
What should really enrage anyone interested in technology is how blatantly companies like Samsung trade in knock-offs of other peoples designs and ideas. Before you protest at that, accept the fact that the ONLY reason Apple keep winning these suits, and successfully "banning" products, is because the various courts of law in various countries wholly accept that Samsung has violated these patents - and Samsung's tit for tat response has not had the same affect because they simply don't have a leg to stand on. If Apple's such an evil behemoth and the likes of Samsung are so great, then why don't they come up with something great on their own WITHOUT handing yet another court victory to Apple?
They enraged me again only last month with their pathetic 4S upgrade, or lack of. Same screen, same lack of features, same speech about how great their product is.
Again a bizarre choice of phrase about a product you evidently had no intention of buying even if the 4S had been designed by the gods themselves and welded out of Martian steel. What do you care? It adds a dual core processor, 1080p video and the best camera on any phone, but to you it's a pathetic upgrade to a phone you've no experience of interest in anyway. Big deal - what is there to be enraged about? Did you Apple stocks dip that day? I'm pretty sure they've bounced back now.
Siri ? its the same product as Vlingo but just developed a bit more. They talk like they invented the wheel !
Siri is the same product as, well, Siri, an iPhone app which predates Vlingo - but yeah, "developed a bit more". Which is a nice understated way to describe software that's much better than other software. Is it the invention of the wheel? No of course not, but it's the first time anything like this has been integrated so deeply into an OS or executed so well - one of the head guys at Google is on record as saying it's "not that useful" which is a perfectly valid point of view, time will tell how useful Apple's competitors think it is a year or two down the track when they traditionally start to catch up.
And now this news i posted, where Apple apparently could file suits against everyone who has location based services which literally applies to every software house and hardware manufacturer out there.
If you stopped to read and understand the article you'd know that Apple didnt create that patent themselves - it was already patented by another company. Meaning that other company already had the power to sue every other software and hardware manufacturer out there INCLUDING Apple, who obviously make ample use of location services in their products and would have been prime target for a suit. All Apple did was take the sensible step of protecting themselves by buying the patent outright, and upfront, meaning they can't be sued themselves. If Google or whoever are that worried about being sued, maybe they should have bought the patent.
Oh come on,Apple have stolen MANY ideas or rather COPIED many ideas from others that other manufacturers did YEARS ago
Phone?? What phone?? |
Miss UK
Joined: Jan 11, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
WoW im scared to step foot in here
I 5/5 agree and disagree whats been put in here from other members.
however I have the best of both phones and from the 2 there very similar
iPhone doesn't want to download music from Google search link though which makes me sad at times
but tracks are 79p so its not that bad!
Android sure you have widgetys, animated wallpapers etc
a little more freedom but there actually pretty similar devices
so personally lovemm both
im not a fangirl either before you question that I just like the use of high end devices 
An "Apple" a day keeps the Doctor at Bay! |
adsada
Joined: Aug 23, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: Scotland
PM |
 The iPhone is a complete copy of the phone, the person who invented the phone should sue them! The market doesn't work that way, take a kettle when Mr Bob got the idea to make it electrical and move the handle on the side for easy pouring etc. shouldn't he be a billionaire by now? It doesn't work like that, and I could go on but tbh I cannot be bothered any more I've made my points clear (read back though the thread if you're interested  ) so here is a pretty good article i'm gonna' stick in here by Wayne Rash:
Steve Jobs’ description of Android as ‘stolen’ is unfair, but his anger that Google developed its own mobile OS knew no bounds, says Wayne Rash
One of the many revelations in the biography of Steve Jobs from author Walter Isaacson is Jobs’ assertion that Android was a “stolen product.” According to Hayley Tsukayama’s report in The Washington Post, Jobs was furious about Android and vowed to spend all of Apple’s cash to destroy it. The problem is Jobs was wrong about Android. Or if he’s right, then the iPhone was also a stolen product.
The reason that Steve Jobs was wrong is fairly simple to see if you’ve watched technology product development over the years. Nearly every product grows on the work done before it and the iPhone (and iPod Touch) are no exception. Apple created a very nice design for the iPhone, a design that was innovative, included new ways of doing things and most of all was attractive. But the iPhone was a derivative of other products, and while it was an improvement over what came before it (as it should be), it still depended on the ideas developed in those earlier products.
Apple was not the first
You have to ask yourself what it was that Jobs thought made Android a stolen product. Was it the user interface of icons on a screen that launched applications when touched? Palm had that feature years before Apple ever had a phone. Was it the touch-screen? Palm had that, too. Was it the third-party applications? Several handheld devices had that long before the iPhone, including some Windows-driven phones as well as those from Palm. Was it the integration of email and the personal digital assistant? There were a lot of those out there, too, including the BlackBerry devices.
So what exactly is it that Jobs thinks Android took from Apple? The sleek look of the device? Can you patent that? The thin profile? The touch keyboard? Apple didn’t invent any of those things, although the company’s designers did a masterful job of integrating them into a single product. Perhaps, it was the ability to play music on your device? Nope, Apple wasn’t first with that, either.
So why is it that Steve Jobs was so willing to blow his company’s cash reserves on an endless marketing and legal campaign to destroy this product? Was it perhaps a statement of Steve Jobs’ famous temperament? Perhaps it was his belief that only Apple could have good ideas? It’s hard to tell now that Jobs is gone, but Jobs was famous for his temperament as related by Doug Hardy in Forbes.
Jobs ‘s vendetta
In reality, the iPhone, as nice as it is, is derivative of the products that preceded it in the market. While Apple did a beautiful job of the user interface, and made a device that’s attractive enough to garner a gazillion followers and an ecosystem that was just closed enough to control while being open enough to gain a great deal of external support, the iPhone still depended on the work of others.
This is true of Apple’s products in general. As nice as the original Macintosh may have been, it depended on Xerox for the original design for the interface. As nice as the Apple II may have been, it too was based on predecessors. But this isn’t to suggest that the Macintosh or the Apple II were bad computers or that they shouldn’t have been developed using the concepts of others. There really is no alternative.
Despite Apple’s claims of uniqueness, the company couldn’t have been completely unique if it expected to actually sell computers. Apple didn’t invent computing after all. The company simply developed software using a different approach from what was emerging elsewhere at the time. Of course, Apple insisted on using a closed platform. The company refused, except for a brief time, to allow clones of its product. And when clones did appear, Apple put them out of business.
I suspect that the only reason Apple escaped the interest of the US Justice Department is that the market share at the time was so small that it would be hard to prove anti-competitive behaviour. But the fact is that Apple could never have existed if not for the ideas and creations of other companies. And there’s nothing wrong with that.
Shifting the bar
For technology to exist at all, it can’t possibly be invented afresh every time. Great products depend on earlier ones that manage to move the state of the art forward. They depend on other changes in other technologies, and they depend on a vast range of ideas beyond the reach of any single company or any single person. Likewise, designs grow from other designs from other places. And companies that believe that their designs are somehow unique and divorced from everything are deluding themselves.
So why was it that Jobs was so irate about Android? Was it because Android came from the company run by Eric Schmidt, one of his board members? I’m sure that Jobs’ sense of betrayal was rooted in this and in his belief that he was the only one who had great ideas. But the fact is that the world is full of great ideas. What Apple did was take some of those great ideas and execute them very well. That in itself is great enough. You don’t need to denigrate others who do the same. And when Jobs did that, he diminished himself in the process."
[ This Message was edited by: adsada on 2011-11-17 23:28 ] |
anonymuser
Joined: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: > 500
PM |
Say what you like about Apple, of course they borrow and build on the odd idea from here or there, but each of their products is essentially their own - their software, their hardware, designed in unison. They have never done what Samsung obviously do, which is to take someone else's product and create the closest possible duplicate they can, right down to the packaging, without (or more recently with) getting sued.
Would or even could the Galaxy Tab have existed without the iPad? Would any of their android phones look or feel (or even exist) the way they do without the iPhone? What is there to defend about a company that makes no effort to create anything original themselves?
|
Bonovox
Joined: Apr 13, 2008
Posts: > 500
PM |
No no no I do not agree with that at all. Android phones would not look or feel the way they do without Apple?? Complete crap. Before Samsung or many manufacturers ventured into the smart phone world there was many touch screen phones with icon based menus & a menus key. Android is not a stolen idea & it completely different from iOS
Phone?? What phone?? |
Miss UK
Joined: Jan 11, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
Can i add I think the iPhone 4/4S has the most amazing display
something yet other manufacturers are yet to even get right
HTC and Samsung screens are amazing still ok but iPhones screen is just pure quality
you have to see it to believe 
An "Apple" a day keeps the Doctor at Bay! |
Bonovox
Joined: Apr 13, 2008
Posts: > 500
PM |
I have seen the Iphone display yes it's nice but Samsung have been making the best quality screens for many years before. The iphone 4/4s display is made by LG
Phone?? What phone?? |
Miss UK
Joined: Jan 11, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
the Samsung galaxy II has a good display but apparently the HTC Sensation is more able to read
smaller text better 
anyway im not starting a war on those phones it's bad enough i get moaned at cos of the iPhone
An "Apple" a day keeps the Doctor at Bay! |
adsada
Joined: Aug 23, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: Scotland
PM |
If there is any truth to that, Apple have for a while now sunk to Android's 'level' offering things which Android had first, such as the task bar, multitasking etc.
Yes it is a fair point that the GS2 is dressed up similar to the iPhone with the box being similar and yes some could say it has similar looks like to the iPhone, but then how different can touch screen phones differ these days?
Anyway the SG2 has been a complete success and you may ask yourself why? Is it because they produced a 'cheap copy of the iPhone'? No. If people want that they can go find a Chinese fake. People buy the SG2 because it offers amazing value for money, it's thin, fast has a great screen*. When it came out last year it had amazing specs that blew everything else out the water, and it was cheaper then the iPhone. It's successful because it offers GVM!
So then Apple, justify that? Because you know you cannot sustain market share with just one phone which is expensive, offers poor value for money, you turn to dirty tactics which in the end are just wrong. They're wrong for the people spending time designing the phones and investing time, money and effort, but most importantly its wrong for the consumer. Ultimately competition is what makes products great and without it, you have a lack of innovation and a poor choice for us.
*the SG2 is marketed as having a great display, but I personally don't like it and prefer the reality display on my arc just wanted to put that in there.
[ This Message was edited by: adsada on 2011-11-18 00:01 ] |
anonymuser
Joined: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: > 500
PM |
It's easy to offer "good value for money" when you don't have to worry about paying people to come up with new ideas. The OS comes free from Google and everything else is "borrowed" finery from your nearest competitor, the one who paid up for all that research and development that kick-started the smartphone sector in the first place - yep, that's a sweet deal Samsung.
|
Miss UK
Joined: Jan 11, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
if you look at the iPhone as being expensive to me its not
EU charges alot for them tho theres no doubt into that but your paying for a high end device
and as ive said prior a while ago who memas NIKE trainers being alot when I was a kid they cost heaps more
but there were other competitors around like RBK or ReeBok which were half the cost of them!
seems alot like phones today you win some you loose some !
if you bought a iPhone from its original country its far cheaper then the price say in EU
i suggest you ppl look at options before you go off minding on Apple!
Apple have really good Customer service ive spoken to Apple on the phone
and they went over there backs to really help me 1
anyway its very late Night Apple savagers
An "Apple" a day keeps the Doctor at Bay! |
Bonovox
Joined: Apr 13, 2008
Posts: > 500
PM |
What other options?? I think it's very expensive.
Phone?? What phone?? |
adsada
Joined: Aug 23, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: Scotland
PM |
On 2011-11-18 01:08:12, Boinng wrote:
It's easy to offer "good value for money" when you don't have to worry about paying people to come up with new ideas. The OS comes free from Google and everything else is "borrowed" finery from your nearest competitor, the one who paid up for all that research and development that kick-started the smartphone sector in the first place - yep, that's a sweet deal Samsung.
It's not all about software, yes I'm sure finding a way to fit a whole load of tech into a case of 8.5 mm of thickness requires nothing more then just to look over at the iPhone to see that they've used apps in a 4x4 grid. And Apple did not start the smartphone sector, whatever you say. It has always existed. The fact that this sector has rapidly increased to become the main sector of phone sales was inevitable with or with Apple, as people look to get more powerful devices and as technology advances.
| |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2011-11-18 00:13
A-D-S-A-D-A 
