10 ms·

No, no, no you guys don't understand. This is not a cheap rip-off. It's an homage and the Swiss will be honoured that their famous clock has been elevated to th

No, no, no you guys don't understand. This is not a cheap rip-off. It's an homage and the Swiss will be honoured that their famous clock has been elevated to the high-art status of Apple design and innovation. The critical eye of an average iPhone user will appreciate the fine craftsmanship & precision of the painstaking work that went into translating the iconic clock into an exact digital replica.

brink 14y ago
I can't downvote you. But I think that this is a prime example of the snarky comments that people are complaining about that are hurting HN's comment quality.
- nettdata 14y ago
  I think you spelled "sarcasm" wrong...
- mladenkovacevic 14y ago
  I absolutely agree. And I let myself sink to a bit of a troll here; but I don't expect much meaningful discussion can be had on this particular topic so I allowed myself (perhaps undeservedly) to express my indignation in a rather toxic way.
- damian2000 14y ago
  One man's snarky comment is another man's sarcastic wit.
  - lifthrasiir 14y ago
    Only when the comment is indeed intended to be a sarcasm. If you want to mark the comment sarcasm you have plenty of methods, e.g. </sarcasm>.
    - jamesbritt 14y ago
      For years and years writers have been able to employ sarcasm and dark wit without resorting to blatant labels tipping off the reader, "Joke ahead!" Why now is this linguistic bludgeon required?
      - epo 14y ago
        Because most people don't have the ability to write clearly enough to express their intent, and also because there are so many literal minded people out there. Labels and smileys serve the same purpose as laugh tracks on TV programmes, they tell the stupid how to react.
      - jmmcd 14y ago
        When I read your comment I agreed. After reading the many comments down-thread which missed rather obvious sarcasm, I reluctantly disagree.
        glhaynes 14y ago
        I hate to be all "in the old days", but, really, threads on HN didn't used to be full of snark and jokes, which obviated this problem. I miss that.
        jamesbritt 14y ago
        Perhaps we should all start assuming that any blunt, snarky comment is really meant as a piss-take. E.g., if you read "Apple is a bunch of blatant design thieves", assume that no one could intend that at face value, so it's really facetious joking meant to express the opposite. We'll all feel a lot better, and the blunt and snarky will realize that their posts are having the reverse effect expected. OK, well, we'll at least all feel better.
- adgar 14y ago
  Snarky comments have always existed on HN. Whether they are downvoted or upvoted is up to the community.
- kbronson 14y ago
  I also can't downvote you, but the comment you refer is apprpriate, correctly written and to the point. The problem is that you don't like the content. That is not what voting is for. On the other hand, your comment (and this one of mine) are pure meta-comments complaining without content.
- mistercow 14y ago
  The way that snarky comments can hurt the community is by hurting people's feelings and making people feel reluctant to show off what they're up to. "Show HN" posts in particular are one of the coolest things about HN, and if people feel like they're going to get torn open just for putting themselves out there, they are unlikely to do so. So there's nothing intrinsically wrong about snarky comments. It's when the snarky comments are targeted at individuals undeserving of such harshness that there's a problem. If someone makes a "Show HN" post, and you think their work is incompetent, or that the problem they're solving isn't important, that doesn't excuse being snarky at them. If, on the other hand, they have blatantly ripped off someone else's work, snarkiness would be fine (assuming you have damned good reason to believe that they did so intentionally, and that they did not ask permission). We should be happy to make people worry about unethical behavior here before posting, because the ethics of your behavior can usually be assessed by introspection. We should not make people think twice about their work being incompetent before posting, because competence cannot easily be judged through introspection. Only by actually posting and seeing constructive feedback will someone be able to know how they can improve. Of course, this applies to more than Show HN posts; people who read HN can also have their work posted by other people. The point is that we don't really need to worry about hurting Apple's feelings over blatantly ripping off someone else's work.
achughes 14y ago
except it doesn't have the pause for 1.5 seconds at the 12 o'clock position... hardly a good copy
- StavrosK 14y ago
  Does the original clock pause? If so, why?
  - jeltz 14y ago
    There is an explanation in the Wikipedia article about the clock (written yesterday). The reason is to give some extra time to close the doors, and to also give the clocks a bit of more room to synchronize with the central clock. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_railway_clock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_railway_clock
    - StavrosK 14y ago
      Ah, thank you, I just read that not a minute ago from another poster's answer. It didn't mention the doors, though.
    - akldfgj 14y ago
      Wow, so the trains don't run on time, so they make the time run on the trains?
      - jeltz 14y ago
        Not really. The second hand takes 58.5 second to move the entire circle at constant speed if I recall correctly. Then it stops for 1.5 seconds before it starts moving again. During that 1.5 second pause you close the doors of the trains. So it is more a method of synching the closing of the doors with the clock rather than actually gaining any time.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
mark_l_watson 14y ago
+1 great sarcasm. Apple is allowed to 'borrow' good ideas but not other companies.
- chj 14y ago
  In Steve's words, this is a great "steal". They probably thought the clock company should feel honored about it. I would like to see their faces now.
  - kamaal 14y ago
    Remember the time Tim cook said, that Apple cannot be the developer for the whole world?
mc32 14y ago
Serious question, if the Railway company was a government institution when the design was released, is the design not in the public domain? Nowadays, it seems they're quasi-governmental, but back then I think they were strictly a national org. It'd be like DARPA trying to get royalties on the internet or something similar. I could be wrong in this line of thinking, of course.
- stordoff 14y ago
  If this was in the US, you could well be correct. In Switzerland, the law is quite likely to be different. It's not uncommon for Governments to have specific copyright rules in non-US jurisdictions (See e.g. Crown copyright[1] used in the UK, Canada, etc.) [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_copyright http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_copyright
- bhousel 14y ago
  Government entities can and often do own intellectual property - patents, trademarks, copyrights - and regularly defend them. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Love_New_York http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Love_New_York for one famous example.
  - mc32 14y ago
    While this is true, there are bounds of I (heart) something_somethings and AFAIK, NYC does not go after them for infringement (I feel as though Apple's rendition is sufficiently different that it's not the same as the orig (hand lengths, motion, etc). Moreover, in the NYC case, I (heart) NY is trademarked and part of an advert campaign, so I can understand their defence of their TM. Did The Swiss RR get a design patent for the timepiece? So, while you are right about the ability of a gov to register and/or patent things, I'm surprised they'd be willing to follow through. It's not as though Apple is trying to make money off of them by selling a knock off product or piggybacking on an advert campaign. Good point none the less and thanks for the explanation.
    - bhousel 14y ago
splamco 14y ago
One man's theft is another man's anonymous homage.
Cushman 14y ago
Sorry, I don't understand the satire here. It sounds like you're mimicking the response to claims that Apple stole designs from Braun? But the two situations are nothing alike -- cribbing industrial design elements from defunct products is a far cry from duplicating a trademarked image more or less exactly. It seems more likely you're trying to dig on Apple for going thermonuclear on trade dress while at the same time stealing somebody else's intellectual property. In which case you have it backwards, and the satire here should be something about how Apple has no right copying someone else's hard work just to make a quick buck, and that a numberless clock face with highly contrasting colors seems obvious now only because they went to so much effort to work it out. Except that's not very funny, because it's exactly right. I doubt if even the most hardcore Apple fanatics would argue SBB doesn't at least have a case. So they'll sue, and Apple might pay a license fee, or change the clock, or argue that the clock has some reason for not being a valid trademark or infringing. And my only question is, if that case goes to trial and SBB wins and Apple has to stop shipping that clock face and pay some compensation, will HN fill up with satirical posts ranting about how you can't copyright a minimal clock face in white, black and red, how this judgment is anticompetitive, stifling to innovation and will surely be thrown out in a higher court very soon now, how much an indictment it is of the copyright system in general? Because that would be a funny joke. Seriously, this community has been weird about Apple of late.
- creamyhorror 14y ago
  the satire here should be something about how Apple has no right copying someone else's hard work just to make a quick buck, and that a numberless clock face with highly contrasting colors seems obvious now only because they went to so much effort to work it out. There's nothing satirical about that. It's pretty obvious this is about perceived hypocrisy on Apple's part. Apple sues for trade dress violations and has now been caught for reproducing someone else's design. It acted against what it perceived as a crime against itself and yet committed the same crime. Simple hypocrisy, aka moral inconsistency in actions - nothing weird about it. If SBB wins, the natural response will be to nod and say Apple got its just deserts. Some people will argue these designs shouldn't be copyrightable in the first place, but that's a separate criticism and does not invalidate the point of hypocrisy in the first place. (Does it really surprise you that some in the community aren't happy about Apple's win over the patents?)
SeoxyS 14y ago
Please let the Swiss speak for themselves as to whether they are honored or offended by this. There's nothing more annoying than having somebody else tell you how to feel about something. For my part (and I'm Swiss, for what it's worth) I appreciate the homage; though I fully understand SBB/CFF's need to protect the trademark. These clocks in Switzerland are iconic and immediately associated with the SBB/CFF. Much like Apple needs to protect its trademark & trade dress in order to remain full owner, SBB/CFF must protect its design.
epo 14y ago
So, will Samsung now sue Apple for allegedly copying a Samsung business method?
batista 14y ago
Misguided sarcasm. It is indeed a homage. 1) Apple didn't copy the design to make it's own clock rip-off. It is for a very tiny part of their original product. 2) Apple didn't copy the design to sell more iPhones. 3) The design is famous. It's not like Apple sneakily copied it thinking no one will notice. 4) It's a common "click of the eye" gesture to design-savvy public, like their basing their podcast app to classic 60's design, etc.
- blktiger 14y ago
  It seems to me that a lot of people on HN are assuming that this design is an intentional rip-off. It's entirely possible that whoever did the icon didn't realize that they had seen a clock like that before and thus didn't realize they might infringe on someone else's trademark.
  - omgsean 14y ago
    That's really unlikely. Those clocks are famous, especially among the types of people who would be in charge of designing a clock at Apple.
    - vadman 14y ago
      Indeed. I don't know much about the designer subculture, but there are a bunch of "iconic" industrial designs that they (should) know about. Another famous one is the IBM wall clock: http://vimeo.com/40953003 http://vimeo.com/40953003 (one of the Windows clock gadgets is obviously inspired by it). (Disclaimer: I am not an Apple fan.) As for the design itself, there is the blatant copying of the seconds hand, but otherwise it seems whoever did it took some care to differentiate the apple clock from the original. E.g. how the lengths of the hour and minute hands relate to the radius of the clock and the size of the hour and minute tick marks. Then of course there are obvious implications of being viewed on a tiny 4" screen. Whether that is enough to build a legal defense on, I have no idea.
      - omgsean 14y ago
ImprovedSilence 14y ago
hahaha, I'm sure every company loves to have a good double-edged sword. Honestly, I think it's different enough, but in the same way I think Samsung products are different enough. Take you pick which way you want it Apple...
halfwit 14y ago
Intellectual honesty time: Show me one person who said such a thing. Every blogger who's supposedly "in the tank" for Apple that I've seen mention this has said nothing of the sort. It's an obvious rip-off, more obvious even than the recent rip-offs of Apple products that have been the subject of so much discussion. That was all about calling a spade a spade, not about defending Apple from its competitors. And this is definitely a spade, anyone with functioning eyeballs can agree. Which is why nobody has had the gall to trot out the horseshit you're implying. Come on.

brink 14y ago

I can't downvote you. But I think that this is a prime example of the snarky comments that people are complaining about that are hurting HN's comment quality.

nettdata 14y ago
I think you spelled "sarcasm" wrong...
mladenkovacevic 14y ago
I absolutely agree. And I let myself sink to a bit of a troll here; but I don't expect much meaningful discussion can be had on this particular topic so I allowed myself (perhaps undeservedly) to express my indignation in a rather toxic way.
damian2000 14y ago
One man's snarky comment is another man's sarcastic wit.
- lifthrasiir 14y ago
  Only when the comment is indeed intended to be a sarcasm. If you want to mark the comment sarcasm you have plenty of methods, e.g. </sarcasm>.
  - jamesbritt 14y ago
    For years and years writers have been able to employ sarcasm and dark wit without resorting to blatant labels tipping off the reader, "Joke ahead!" Why now is this linguistic bludgeon required?
    - epo 14y ago
      Because most people don't have the ability to write clearly enough to express their intent, and also because there are so many literal minded people out there. Labels and smileys serve the same purpose as laugh tracks on TV programmes, they tell the stupid how to react.
    - jmmcd 14y ago
      When I read your comment I agreed. After reading the many comments down-thread which missed rather obvious sarcasm, I reluctantly disagree.
      - glhaynes 14y ago
        I hate to be all "in the old days", but, really, threads on HN didn't used to be full of snark and jokes, which obviated this problem. I miss that.
        jamesbritt 14y ago
        Perhaps we should all start assuming that any blunt, snarky comment is really meant as a piss-take. E.g., if you read "Apple is a bunch of blatant design thieves", assume that no one could intend that at face value, so it's really facetious joking meant to express the opposite. We'll all feel a lot better, and the blunt and snarky will realize that their posts are having the reverse effect expected. OK, well, we'll at least all feel better.
adgar 14y ago
Snarky comments have always existed on HN. Whether they are downvoted or upvoted is up to the community.
kbronson 14y ago
I also can't downvote you, but the comment you refer is apprpriate, correctly written and to the point. The problem is that you don't like the content. That is not what voting is for. On the other hand, your comment (and this one of mine) are pure meta-comments complaining without content.
mistercow 14y ago
The way that snarky comments can hurt the community is by hurting people's feelings and making people feel reluctant to show off what they're up to. "Show HN" posts in particular are one of the coolest things about HN, and if people feel like they're going to get torn open just for putting themselves out there, they are unlikely to do so. So there's nothing intrinsically wrong about snarky comments. It's when the snarky comments are targeted at individuals undeserving of such harshness that there's a problem. If someone makes a "Show HN" post, and you think their work is incompetent, or that the problem they're solving isn't important, that doesn't excuse being snarky at them. If, on the other hand, they have blatantly ripped off someone else's work, snarkiness would be fine (assuming you have damned good reason to believe that they did so intentionally, and that they did not ask permission). We should be happy to make people worry about unethical behavior here before posting, because the ethics of your behavior can usually be assessed by introspection. We should not make people think twice about their work being incompetent before posting, because competence cannot easily be judged through introspection. Only by actually posting and seeing constructive feedback will someone be able to know how they can improve. Of course, this applies to more than Show HN posts; people who read HN can also have their work posted by other people. The point is that we don't really need to worry about hurting Apple's feelings over blatantly ripping off someone else's work.

achughes 14y ago

except it doesn't have the pause for 1.5 seconds at the 12 o'clock position... hardly a good copy

StavrosK 14y ago
Does the original clock pause? If so, why?
- jeltz 14y ago
  There is an explanation in the Wikipedia article about the clock (written yesterday). The reason is to give some extra time to close the doors, and to also give the clocks a bit of more room to synchronize with the central clock. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_railway_clock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_railway_clock
  - StavrosK 14y ago
    Ah, thank you, I just read that not a minute ago from another poster's answer. It didn't mention the doors, though.
  - akldfgj 14y ago
    Wow, so the trains don't run on time, so they make the time run on the trains?
    - jeltz 14y ago
      Not really. The second hand takes 58.5 second to move the entire circle at constant speed if I recall correctly. Then it stops for 1.5 seconds before it starts moving again. During that 1.5 second pause you close the doors of the trains. So it is more a method of synching the closing of the doors with the clock rather than actually gaining any time.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]

mark_l_watson 14y ago

+1 great sarcasm. Apple is allowed to 'borrow' good ideas but not other companies.

chj 14y ago
In Steve's words, this is a great "steal". They probably thought the clock company should feel honored about it. I would like to see their faces now.
- kamaal 14y ago
  Remember the time Tim cook said, that Apple cannot be the developer for the whole world?

mc32 14y ago

Serious question, if the Railway company was a government institution when the design was released, is the design not in the public domain? Nowadays, it seems they're quasi-governmental, but back then I think they were strictly a national org. It'd be like DARPA trying to get royalties on the internet or something similar. I could be wrong in this line of thinking, of course.

stordoff 14y ago
If this was in the US, you could well be correct. In Switzerland, the law is quite likely to be different. It's not uncommon for Governments to have specific copyright rules in non-US jurisdictions (See e.g. Crown copyright[1] used in the UK, Canada, etc.) [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_copyright http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_copyright
bhousel 14y ago
Government entities can and often do own intellectual property - patents, trademarks, copyrights - and regularly defend them. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Love_New_York http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Love_New_York for one famous example.
- mc32 14y ago
  While this is true, there are bounds of I (heart) something_somethings and AFAIK, NYC does not go after them for infringement (I feel as though Apple's rendition is sufficiently different that it's not the same as the orig (hand lengths, motion, etc). Moreover, in the NYC case, I (heart) NY is trademarked and part of an advert campaign, so I can understand their defence of their TM. Did The Swiss RR get a design patent for the timepiece? So, while you are right about the ability of a gov to register and/or patent things, I'm surprised they'd be willing to follow through. It's not as though Apple is trying to make money off of them by selling a knock off product or piggybacking on an advert campaign. Good point none the less and thanks for the explanation.
  - bhousel 14y ago

splamco 14y ago

One man's theft is another man's anonymous homage.

Cushman 14y ago

Sorry, I don't understand the satire here. It sounds like you're mimicking the response to claims that Apple stole designs from Braun? But the two situations are nothing alike -- cribbing industrial design elements from defunct products is a far cry from duplicating a trademarked image more or less exactly. It seems more likely you're trying to dig on Apple for going thermonuclear on trade dress while at the same time stealing somebody else's intellectual property. In which case you have it backwards, and the satire here should be something about how Apple has no right copying someone else's hard work just to make a quick buck, and that a numberless clock face with highly contrasting colors seems obvious now only because they went to so much effort to work it out. Except that's not very funny, because it's exactly right. I doubt if even the most hardcore Apple fanatics would argue SBB doesn't at least have a case. So they'll sue, and Apple might pay a license fee, or change the clock, or argue that the clock has some reason for not being a valid trademark or infringing. And my only question is, if that case goes to trial and SBB wins and Apple has to stop shipping that clock face and pay some compensation, will HN fill up with satirical posts ranting about how you can't copyright a minimal clock face in white, black and red, how this judgment is anticompetitive, stifling to innovation and will surely be thrown out in a higher court very soon now, how much an indictment it is of the copyright system in general? Because that would be a funny joke. Seriously, this community has been weird about Apple of late.

creamyhorror 14y ago
the satire here should be something about how Apple has no right copying someone else's hard work just to make a quick buck, and that a numberless clock face with highly contrasting colors seems obvious now only because they went to so much effort to work it out. There's nothing satirical about that. It's pretty obvious this is about perceived hypocrisy on Apple's part. Apple sues for trade dress violations and has now been caught for reproducing someone else's design. It acted against what it perceived as a crime against itself and yet committed the same crime. Simple hypocrisy, aka moral inconsistency in actions - nothing weird about it. If SBB wins, the natural response will be to nod and say Apple got its just deserts. Some people will argue these designs shouldn't be copyrightable in the first place, but that's a separate criticism and does not invalidate the point of hypocrisy in the first place. (Does it really surprise you that some in the community aren't happy about Apple's win over the patents?)

SeoxyS 14y ago

Please let the Swiss speak for themselves as to whether they are honored or offended by this. There's nothing more annoying than having somebody else tell you how to feel about something. For my part (and I'm Swiss, for what it's worth) I appreciate the homage; though I fully understand SBB/CFF's need to protect the trademark. These clocks in Switzerland are iconic and immediately associated with the SBB/CFF. Much like Apple needs to protect its trademark & trade dress in order to remain full owner, SBB/CFF must protect its design.

epo 14y ago

So, will Samsung now sue Apple for allegedly copying a Samsung business method?

batista 14y ago

Misguided sarcasm. It is indeed a homage. 1) Apple didn't copy the design to make it's own clock rip-off. It is for a very tiny part of their original product. 2) Apple didn't copy the design to sell more iPhones. 3) The design is famous. It's not like Apple sneakily copied it thinking no one will notice. 4) It's a common "click of the eye" gesture to design-savvy public, like their basing their podcast app to classic 60's design, etc.

blktiger 14y ago
It seems to me that a lot of people on HN are assuming that this design is an intentional rip-off. It's entirely possible that whoever did the icon didn't realize that they had seen a clock like that before and thus didn't realize they might infringe on someone else's trademark.
- omgsean 14y ago
  That's really unlikely. Those clocks are famous, especially among the types of people who would be in charge of designing a clock at Apple.
  - vadman 14y ago
    Indeed. I don't know much about the designer subculture, but there are a bunch of "iconic" industrial designs that they (should) know about. Another famous one is the IBM wall clock: http://vimeo.com/40953003 http://vimeo.com/40953003 (one of the Windows clock gadgets is obviously inspired by it). (Disclaimer: I am not an Apple fan.) As for the design itself, there is the blatant copying of the seconds hand, but otherwise it seems whoever did it took some care to differentiate the apple clock from the original. E.g. how the lengths of the hour and minute hands relate to the radius of the clock and the size of the hour and minute tick marks. Then of course there are obvious implications of being viewed on a tiny 4" screen. Whether that is enough to build a legal defense on, I have no idea.
    - omgsean 14y ago

ImprovedSilence 14y ago

hahaha, I'm sure every company loves to have a good double-edged sword. Honestly, I think it's different enough, but in the same way I think Samsung products are different enough. Take you pick which way you want it Apple...

halfwit 14y ago

Intellectual honesty time: Show me one person who said such a thing. Every blogger who's supposedly "in the tank" for Apple that I've seen mention this has said nothing of the sort. It's an obvious rip-off, more obvious even than the recent rip-offs of Apple products that have been the subject of so much discussion. That was all about calling a spade a spade, not about defending Apple from its competitors. And this is definitely a spade, anyone with functioning eyeballs can agree. Which is why nobody has had the gall to trot out the horseshit you're implying. Come on.