3 ms·

>If it were not for apple... If it were not for Apple, we would be seeing better phones than the iPhone with amazing designs (read as 'rounded corners'), witho

by neya 14y ago

>If it were not for apple... If it were not for Apple, we would be seeing better phones than the iPhone with amazing designs (read as 'rounded corners'), without any limited functionality (Eg. Universal Search). I do not support Samsung completely, because I do believe they DID cross a line by making their phones resemble too similar to the iPhone. But I don't agree with Apple winning based on a bunch of BS patents can be claimed as innovative. And I don't agree with Apple saving the market by making really awesome products. Nor do I agree with these patents being non-obvious. Rounded corners, slide to unlock, bounce-back...seriously? If it wasn't for Apple, eventually someone would have made it, because the technology was already available before and it wasn't like Apple invented them all. Here's an image that might interest you: http://d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net/photo/5195630_700b.jpg http://d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net/photo/5195630_700b.jpg

taligent 14y ago
No offense. But you are so ignorant about the facts it is scary. Apple does NOT have a patent on rounded corners any more than Coke has a patent on soda bottles.
brisance 14y ago
The icon layout was also in the Newton MessagePad, which pre-dated Windows CE. Rounded corners by themselves are not what made the case; it's that rounded corners, having the same grid layout, same connectors, same screen-edge "rubber band bounce-back", same coloured icons and claiming those as "obvious" when it was demonstrably proven that these things were not at that time, were what made the jury decide in Apple's favor.