4 ms·

Or maybe they cloned Visual Studio. Or Flash Builder. Or whatever. All of the IDEs with a design surface are largely the same. Seriously- this is an IDE for te

Or maybe they cloned Visual Studio. Or Flash Builder. Or whatever. All of the IDEs with a design surface are largely the same. Seriously- this is an IDE for televisions.

gilini 14y ago
Agreed. Qt Designer used to look pretty much the same as well. Actually, I don't know why this court nonsense is still making the news.
- taligent 14y ago
  Just went all the previous QT Designer screenshots in Google Images. And not a single one looks similar to either Xcode or the Samsung IDE. And the court nonsense is still news because the case isn't over yet and this is demonstrating a pattern of copying by Samsung.
  - gilini 14y ago
    Let me help you out then. QT Designer: http://www.cppblog.com/images/cppblog_com/lai3d/qt-designer.jpg http://www.cppblog.com/images/cppblog_com/lai3d/qt-designer.... Samsung: http://i50.tinypic.com/suu26w.jpg http://i50.tinypic.com/suu26w.jpg I still think there's too much attention being given to this trial by tech people. Much more than it deserves.
fredoliveira 14y ago
If you've used Xcode before, you'll recognize things they copied that are not the norm in other IDEs. The object library, IB screen, the layout buttons on the toolbar (the entire toolbar, really). Sure, it's just an IDE, but heck if it doesn't look strikingly similar to Xcode. edit: cmelbye in this thread has a good comparison: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4378379 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4378379
- ajross 14y ago
  Other than the placement (but not iconography: those come straight from the 1980's VCR) of the Start/Stop buttons, I'm actually not quite sure that I see much. Can you elaborate? What's an "IB screen" (if it's the visual layout thing, I gotta say you're off by about 15 years trying to attribute that to Apple). But fair enough: let's say they cloned it. Now what? What corrective action should be taken? What if Eclipse did the same thing (as, of course, Eclipse basically did to VC++)? You're trying to make some kind of moral point, so it would help your case if you spelled it out. I'll spell out my position: cloning a UI is fine. There is a long history of this in the technology industry, and we're all richer for it. Condemning someone for cloning your favorite candy maker's recipe is nothing but base fanboism, and hurtful to all of us.
  - joeoreilly 14y ago
    You are clearly the kind of unimaginative person Samsung is out to hire! Oh, Interface Builder 1986. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interface_Builder
  - fredoliveira 14y ago
    Come on, you were going well until you threw around the fanboism argument. But I'll bite: I do not think cloning a UI is fine. I think drawing inspiration from a UI is fine, because indeed, any new thing stands on the shoulders of what came before it. But actually cloning a UI (your words, cited) is making a clone, a copy, whose result is certainly not evolution or innovation. You're making a facsimile, doing no real creative work (or innovative work) to cut corners. To me, this is less about it being Samsung and Apple, but about cutting corners in a blatant way. It's dumb, it's misguided, and these guys should know better. Just as you shouldn't ever say that cloning a UI is fine.

Or maybe they cloned Visual Studio. Or Flash Builder. Or whatever. All of the IDEs with a design surface are largely the same. Seriously- this is an IDE for televisions.

gilini 14y ago

Agreed. Qt Designer used to look pretty much the same as well. Actually, I don't know why this court nonsense is still making the news.

taligent 14y ago
Just went all the previous QT Designer screenshots in Google Images. And not a single one looks similar to either Xcode or the Samsung IDE. And the court nonsense is still news because the case isn't over yet and this is demonstrating a pattern of copying by Samsung.
- gilini 14y ago
  Let me help you out then. QT Designer: http://www.cppblog.com/images/cppblog_com/lai3d/qt-designer.jpg http://www.cppblog.com/images/cppblog_com/lai3d/qt-designer.... Samsung: http://i50.tinypic.com/suu26w.jpg http://i50.tinypic.com/suu26w.jpg I still think there's too much attention being given to this trial by tech people. Much more than it deserves.

fredoliveira 14y ago

If you've used Xcode before, you'll recognize things they copied that are not the norm in other IDEs. The object library, IB screen, the layout buttons on the toolbar (the entire toolbar, really). Sure, it's just an IDE, but heck if it doesn't look strikingly similar to Xcode. edit: cmelbye in this thread has a good comparison: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4378379 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4378379

ajross 14y ago
Other than the placement (but not iconography: those come straight from the 1980's VCR) of the Start/Stop buttons, I'm actually not quite sure that I see much. Can you elaborate? What's an "IB screen" (if it's the visual layout thing, I gotta say you're off by about 15 years trying to attribute that to Apple). But fair enough: let's say they cloned it. Now what? What corrective action should be taken? What if Eclipse did the same thing (as, of course, Eclipse basically did to VC++)? You're trying to make some kind of moral point, so it would help your case if you spelled it out. I'll spell out my position: cloning a UI is fine. There is a long history of this in the technology industry, and we're all richer for it. Condemning someone for cloning your favorite candy maker's recipe is nothing but base fanboism, and hurtful to all of us.
- joeoreilly 14y ago
  You are clearly the kind of unimaginative person Samsung is out to hire! Oh, Interface Builder 1986. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interface_Builder
- fredoliveira 14y ago
  Come on, you were going well until you threw around the fanboism argument. But I'll bite: I do not think cloning a UI is fine. I think drawing inspiration from a UI is fine, because indeed, any new thing stands on the shoulders of what came before it. But actually cloning a UI (your words, cited) is making a clone, a copy, whose result is certainly not evolution or innovation. You're making a facsimile, doing no real creative work (or innovative work) to cut corners. To me, this is less about it being Samsung and Apple, but about cutting corners in a blatant way. It's dumb, it's misguided, and these guys should know better. Just as you shouldn't ever say that cloning a UI is fine.