4 ms·

The Voice-Features on the G2 are mixed Google and Vlingo products. Samsung chose to incorporate Vlingos Technology in addition to Googles since it allows for e

The Voice-Features on the G2 are mixed Google and Vlingo products. Samsung chose to incorporate Vlingos Technology in addition to Googles since it allows for easier in-car usage of the Phone. Why do people always compare the Applists? There are not many ways to display a list of icons in a meaningful way. The Windows Desktop has had a grid of icons for years and there was much else like that beforehand, but in addition the Android handsets offer more useful ways of using the screen when not starting apps(widgets&live backgrounds). I won't admit that Samsung sure took inspiration from Apple, but that is true for most of the things, if not only because of usability reasons. There are just some design patterns that have proven to work and which people have come to expect. The race should be about who makes the best phone, not who made the first design patents. Apple didn't have copy and paste on a mobile phone long after windows mobile had it... should microsoft have sued because of that? I just want the best of all worlds and Samsung delivers there. If they have to stop selling the Galaxies in Europe, i'd import them from Asia.

SnowLprd 15y ago
It's not just the app icon layout. It should be obvious to any casual observer just how many things Samsung copied: the highlighting on the bottom row of icons, the dots that represent different pages of apps, the overall aesthetics of the handset itself, etc. Pointing out one of these things and saying "Should Apple have a monopoly on X?" is, once again, missing the point. It's the combination of X, Y, and Z that makes the product look like an iPhone instead of a differentiated product. Defending this practice with "There aren't many ways to do X" doesn't seem like a very persuasive argument. Before the iPhone was introduced, companies seemed to find a myriad of ways to do these same things. Once the iPhone became overwhelmingly popular, however, companies like Samsung stopped trying to raise the bar and just made their products as Apple-like as possible. So to reiterate my original point, I think Samsung should differentiate their design functions and aesthetics instead of mimicking Apple. Samsung isn't going to hit the ball out of the park if they keep making conservative bets -- they should take some chances. But as I said from the very beginning, the common good is better served without all this software patent litigation crap. As much as I think Samsung does itself a disservice by mimicking Apple so closely, it probably should be regulated to a moral question rather than a legal one.

SnowLprd 15y ago

It's not just the app icon layout. It should be obvious to any casual observer just how many things Samsung copied: the highlighting on the bottom row of icons, the dots that represent different pages of apps, the overall aesthetics of the handset itself, etc. Pointing out one of these things and saying "Should Apple have a monopoly on X?" is, once again, missing the point. It's the combination of X, Y, and Z that makes the product look like an iPhone instead of a differentiated product. Defending this practice with "There aren't many ways to do X" doesn't seem like a very persuasive argument. Before the iPhone was introduced, companies seemed to find a myriad of ways to do these same things. Once the iPhone became overwhelmingly popular, however, companies like Samsung stopped trying to raise the bar and just made their products as Apple-like as possible. So to reiterate my original point, I think Samsung should differentiate their design functions and aesthetics instead of mimicking Apple. Samsung isn't going to hit the ball out of the park if they keep making conservative bets -- they should take some chances. But as I said from the very beginning, the common good is better served without all this software patent litigation crap. As much as I think Samsung does itself a disservice by mimicking Apple so closely, it probably should be regulated to a moral question rather than a legal one.