3 ms·

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 t

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.

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.