10 ms·

People have to stop thinking about which side is more fun to "cheer" to and start thinking about what's in your best interest as a consumer. Everyone copies eve

People have to stop thinking about which side is more fun to "cheer" to and start thinking about what's in your best interest as a consumer. Everyone copies everyone [1]. Apple copied a lot of features from Android [2] and improved upon them. Samsung copied a lot of stuff from Apple and improved them to levels Apple had never gone to before. [3] As the author of the article shows. Copying doesn't stop innovation. It has always been like this with any innovation. There's a reason Newton and Einstein said "I can only see so far because I'm standing in the shoulder of giants". Any innovation made by humans is inspired by hundreds of years of history. For us as consumers, it doesn't matter. At the end of the day we get better products from this. We gain from innovation and competition. If Apple didn't copy Android, your iPhone would be worse. If Samsung didn't copy Apple, the best selling phone in the market would be worse. And every consumer would lose. If Apple wins this. It would be bad for every smartphone user on the planet. Including iPhone users. If you love your phone and tech innovation. You should be hoping Samsung wins, even if you have an iPhone. [1] http://www.bonkersworld.net/great-artists-steal/ http://www.bonkersworld.net/great-artists-steal/ [2] http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/apple-copies-a-bunch-of-features-from-android-calls-it-ios5-updated/2295 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/apple-copies-a-bunch-of-f... [3] http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/15/samsung-galaxy-note-10-1-review/ http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/15/samsung-galaxy-note-10-1-...

gurkendoktor 14y ago
Progress is not a linear measure. Patents can help to keep hardware vendors away from converging towards the same design, which would be bad for product variety.
GHFigs 14y ago
If Samsung didn't copy Apple, the best selling phone in the market would be worse. A worse phone would still be the best selling?
- talmand 14y ago
  Obviously if the current best-selling phone was worse then it would not be the best-selling phone. I believe that his point is that without innovating (copying if you will) it probably wouldn't exist as it is today, or if at all, which would be a loss for the consumer.
- BCM43 14y ago
  You could interpret that a few different ways, but I read it as either "the current best selling phone (iPhone?) would be worse (and not necessarily best selling) if Samsung did not copy Apple" or "the best selling phone if Samsung did not copy Apple would be worse than the best selling phone when Samsung did copy Apple."
- printer 14y ago
  Yes. Super cars are not best selling cars.
sujal 14y ago
I agree with you re: "cheering" a side, but I don't agreew ith your broad conclusion that Samsung is innovating through copying. Here's my counter for this entire argument: There's no reason to copy certain things: http://fatmixx.com/2010/12/07/samsungs-galaxy-tab-has-a-familiar-looking-connector/ http://fatmixx.com/2010/12/07/samsungs-galaxy-tab-has-a-fami... I also don't agree that Samsung "improved" upon Apple's work, at least not for the devices Apple is suing for. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the Note is not one of those devices. Samsung is in a different category of copying from what you're describing, IMHO. That's why I'm OK with Apple suing them. I don't know if I like that Apple is suing them, but I'm not going to condemn them for it.
turbogt 14y ago
I agree with @vibrunazo, we have to think in term of consumer benefit point of view. competition is good thing, improving existing product segment or competitive product is perfect business model. there were smart phone before iphone, tablet before ipad, pc before imac, settop_box before apple_tv etc,,, xwindows before macos,, Apple improved existing competitive products, as Samsung did. Android is improvement over SideKick, used linux which is already existing technology and Dalvik on Java etc... wheel to automoble to air plain to spaceship? :) you got the point. it's all about reusing or leveraging existing technology for benefit of consumer needs - incremental innovation!
- yesbabyyes 14y ago
  I'm not in disagreement and don't want to split hairs, but for posterity: xwindows before macos Actually, no. MacOS predates X by a few months. X Window System was introduced on June 19th, 1984 [1], while MacOS was released with the Macintosh on January 24th, 1984 [2]. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System#Introduction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System#Introduction [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mac_OS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mac_OS
  - turbogt 14y ago
    @yesbabyyes you are right, I meant to say XPARC :)
roc 14y ago
Competition is great. But there's a point where the "copying" that we as consumers like and benefit from crosses a line and becomes a shameless "knock-off" that we as consumers truly do not benefit from. It's not at all clear that Samsung has crossed that line, but the line exists none-the-less and we as consumers benefit from there being a legal process to determine when the line has been crossed and penalties for those who cross it. And in recognizing that we need such a line and a legal system to determine whether it's been crossed, we must allow that fuzzy cases such as these are inevitable. No matter how we might reform the system.
- rednukleus 14y ago
  There is nothing in any of these patent cases that even approaches the "shameless knock-off" territory. There are products coming out of China that are counterfits, or very close to existing products - and they should be banned. You would have to be both blind and stupid to not be able to tell the difference between any two Android and iOS phones.
  - roc 14y ago
    Yes, it's quite a bit like that old saying about pornography "I know it when I see it". But that hardly changes the point that there is no reform that can both prevent such suits and protect our interests as consumers.
  - fkdjs 14y ago
    A shameless knock off copies _everything_. A shameless rolex copies everything from a rolex. Rolex doesn't copy anything from their knockoffs. There has to be one way copying to classify a product as a knockoff. Instead, Apple has copied many features from android, so it's not a case of samsung / android being knockoff products. If anything, consumers have benefited from copying! Everyone complained about iOS notifications, then they copied android notifications. And consumers benefited. The fact that we are even having this discussion is nauseating. It's painfully obvious what the outcome should be in terms of what's best for consumers. A rich ecosystem which combines copying with innovation.
Steko 14y ago
"it sounds like a perfectly functioning competitive market." This "anthropic principle" for technology cuts both ways. The current market was made with current patent/trade dress law where people who copy too close are sometimes punished. You can't on the one side extoll it's wonders and on the other side say let's toss this whole side of it out and assume we'd see the same capital investments in the counterfactual.
eridius 14y ago
Samsung copied a lot of stuff from Apple and improved them to levels Apple had never gone to before. Could you elaborate? You linked to a reasonably long review. What parts of that review are you trying to refer to? I ask because this is the first time I've ever heard this claim.
Someone 14y ago
I cannot quite follow that logic. The way I read it, the argument is "Yes, we keep stealing the things you build, but hey, look how good you have become at building new things! Even better: the world gets better from it. You have no reason to complain" Should one really cheer one side because it is in one's best interest?

gurkendoktor 14y ago

Progress is not a linear measure. Patents can help to keep hardware vendors away from converging towards the same design, which would be bad for product variety.

GHFigs 14y ago

If Samsung didn't copy Apple, the best selling phone in the market would be worse. A worse phone would still be the best selling?

talmand 14y ago
Obviously if the current best-selling phone was worse then it would not be the best-selling phone. I believe that his point is that without innovating (copying if you will) it probably wouldn't exist as it is today, or if at all, which would be a loss for the consumer.
BCM43 14y ago
You could interpret that a few different ways, but I read it as either "the current best selling phone (iPhone?) would be worse (and not necessarily best selling) if Samsung did not copy Apple" or "the best selling phone if Samsung did not copy Apple would be worse than the best selling phone when Samsung did copy Apple."
printer 14y ago
Yes. Super cars are not best selling cars.

sujal 14y ago

I agree with you re: "cheering" a side, but I don't agreew ith your broad conclusion that Samsung is innovating through copying. Here's my counter for this entire argument: There's no reason to copy certain things: http://fatmixx.com/2010/12/07/samsungs-galaxy-tab-has-a-familiar-looking-connector/ http://fatmixx.com/2010/12/07/samsungs-galaxy-tab-has-a-fami... I also don't agree that Samsung "improved" upon Apple's work, at least not for the devices Apple is suing for. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the Note is not one of those devices. Samsung is in a different category of copying from what you're describing, IMHO. That's why I'm OK with Apple suing them. I don't know if I like that Apple is suing them, but I'm not going to condemn them for it.

turbogt 14y ago

I agree with @vibrunazo, we have to think in term of consumer benefit point of view. competition is good thing, improving existing product segment or competitive product is perfect business model. there were smart phone before iphone, tablet before ipad, pc before imac, settop_box before apple_tv etc,,, xwindows before macos,, Apple improved existing competitive products, as Samsung did. Android is improvement over SideKick, used linux which is already existing technology and Dalvik on Java etc... wheel to automoble to air plain to spaceship? :) you got the point. it's all about reusing or leveraging existing technology for benefit of consumer needs - incremental innovation!

yesbabyyes 14y ago
I'm not in disagreement and don't want to split hairs, but for posterity: xwindows before macos Actually, no. MacOS predates X by a few months. X Window System was introduced on June 19th, 1984 [1], while MacOS was released with the Macintosh on January 24th, 1984 [2]. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System#Introduction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System#Introduction [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mac_OS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mac_OS
- turbogt 14y ago
  @yesbabyyes you are right, I meant to say XPARC :)

roc 14y ago

Competition is great. But there's a point where the "copying" that we as consumers like and benefit from crosses a line and becomes a shameless "knock-off" that we as consumers truly do not benefit from. It's not at all clear that Samsung has crossed that line, but the line exists none-the-less and we as consumers benefit from there being a legal process to determine when the line has been crossed and penalties for those who cross it. And in recognizing that we need such a line and a legal system to determine whether it's been crossed, we must allow that fuzzy cases such as these are inevitable. No matter how we might reform the system.

rednukleus 14y ago
There is nothing in any of these patent cases that even approaches the "shameless knock-off" territory. There are products coming out of China that are counterfits, or very close to existing products - and they should be banned. You would have to be both blind and stupid to not be able to tell the difference between any two Android and iOS phones.
- roc 14y ago
  Yes, it's quite a bit like that old saying about pornography "I know it when I see it". But that hardly changes the point that there is no reform that can both prevent such suits and protect our interests as consumers.
- fkdjs 14y ago
  A shameless knock off copies _everything_. A shameless rolex copies everything from a rolex. Rolex doesn't copy anything from their knockoffs. There has to be one way copying to classify a product as a knockoff. Instead, Apple has copied many features from android, so it's not a case of samsung / android being knockoff products. If anything, consumers have benefited from copying! Everyone complained about iOS notifications, then they copied android notifications. And consumers benefited. The fact that we are even having this discussion is nauseating. It's painfully obvious what the outcome should be in terms of what's best for consumers. A rich ecosystem which combines copying with innovation.

Steko 14y ago

"it sounds like a perfectly functioning competitive market." This "anthropic principle" for technology cuts both ways. The current market was made with current patent/trade dress law where people who copy too close are sometimes punished. You can't on the one side extoll it's wonders and on the other side say let's toss this whole side of it out and assume we'd see the same capital investments in the counterfactual.

eridius 14y ago

Samsung copied a lot of stuff from Apple and improved them to levels Apple had never gone to before. Could you elaborate? You linked to a reasonably long review. What parts of that review are you trying to refer to? I ask because this is the first time I've ever heard this claim.

Someone 14y ago

I cannot quite follow that logic. The way I read it, the argument is "Yes, we keep stealing the things you build, but hey, look how good you have become at building new things! Even better: the world gets better from it. You have no reason to complain" Should one really cheer one side because it is in one's best interest?