8 ms·

These arguments always strike me as coming from people who don't actually understand what design is. The folks who think that design is the font face, the weigh

These arguments always strike me as coming from people who don't actually understand what design is. The folks who think that design is the font face, the weight of lines, the colors used. Those are all facets of design, but they are essentially just tools to accomplish the goal: experience and engagement. What you are noticing are just trends, and this is nothing new. Look back over the history of even just twentieth century graphic/print design, and you will see how marked trends define periods in time. The fact that one product or group uses the same or similar elements to another does not say that one is the copy of another, simply that they are both products of the same era. I haven't used iOS 7 yet, so I can't say this with certainty, but based on my experience with Apple, I feel pretty confident to say that they may have integrated similar graphic motifs you're familiar with from other platforms, but the end experience will be leaps and bounds better than others who've tried to implement the same elements. There is real thought put into how a person will best use this product, not just how clean and pretty the UI can look.

thezilch 13y ago
These arguments always strike me as coming from people who only spend time with Apple's designs. The folks who think that only Apple designers are leaps and bounds better, are the only thoughtful producers, and are the sole visionaries beyond just the UI. Let's face it; look to the Samsung vs. Apple case to see how it is the laymen making billion dollar calls. Not designers. It's not designers that Apple has a majority rule over.
- nilliams 13y ago
  >> The folks who think that only Apple designers are leaps and bounds better Parent doesn't say that at all, or make any comparisons.
  - James_Duval 13y ago
    S/he's illustrating how meaningless it is to say "this is the kind of argument made by people like x", and how easily such an 'argument' can be turned on its head.
- LowKarmaAccount 13y ago
  >Let's face it; look to the Samsung vs. Apple case to see how it is the laymen making billion dollar calls. The damages were reduced to $600 million after the judge ruled that the jury's used an "impermissible legal theory" to award damages, and ordered a new trial.[1] The jury foreman had a technical background and lied during voir dire by failing to mention that he had history of suing others for patent abuse.[2] He was the one he told the other jurors to ignore prior art and assume that Samsung had violated the patents.[3] So it isn't fair to say that laymen decided the damages. After the trial, a patent('380, bounce-back) that Apple relied heavily upon during the trial to prove that Samsung was "infringing on their innovative designs" was invalidated by the USPTO.[3] This means that if the jury had been competent and searched for prior art (which the foreman with technical experience told them to ignore), or if Samsung had been allowed to present evidence demonstrating prior art, it is probable that no damages would have been awarded at all. [1]: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130301161659602 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130301161659602 [2]: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20121031200136965 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20121031200136965 [3]:http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130402121308772 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130402121308772
  - thezilch 13y ago
    I think it's fair; I don't think you rebuke my point. Take out the foreman, and the jury is even more lay than prior and less biased, as you point out. The very nature of juries is to "educate" a lay jury, but the lawyers aren't likely designers, nor the judge, nor the USPTO. I don't disagree with the OP on there being design eras, everyone freely building atop prior art, but laymen rule the trade/dress rulings and the sales of products. The entire hoopla surrounding Apple lawsuits has to do with them insisting laymen are confused into thinking other products are "that Apple thing my daughter needs."
Geee 13y ago
No, this isn't true this time. I have been using iOS 7 on iPhone 5 for a day now, and I have mixed feelings. I have always trusted Apple to 'get it right' and be delighted with thought-out details and just no-frills great UX. I know it's Beta, but it honestly looks and feels like Android with a bit of lag here and there, some stuttering animations, confusing unlock and answer call screens, too thin fonts for my taste, icons and iconography aren't that great either (opinion), completely unnecessary eye-candy with animated parallax background which doesn't even work very well, etc. Don't get me wrong, it's not that bad, but 'leaps and bounds better', I say no. I'm sure they'll redefine the design for final product though.
- LowKarmaAccount 13y ago
  Have you had a chance to beta-test any of the previous iOS releases? It is possible that other iOS releases had lag issues that were fixed before the release to the general public.
  - jkubicek 13y ago
    iOS 7 (beta) seems just as fast/stable as any previous beta release. iOS 4 was completely unusable on it's first release.
  - Geee 13y ago
    No, I haven't tried beta releases before. I'm sure they'll get rid of all minor annoyances such as bit of lag or weird layout reflows. It was reported that they are working on the new design behind schedule, so I think this release was made in a bit of hurry.
    - epochwolf 13y ago
      All of their beta releases have had these problems. Apple betas really are betas.
      - mrgordon 13y ago
        Exactly. You should have seen the Leopard nightlies. The top bar translucency was off for a while and it was basically non-functional. The dock would crash regularly, etc.
bdt101 13y ago
Even if these are just trends, we now see Apple following trends rather than setting them. That's a significant change.
- rustynails77 13y ago
  Noone should see this as Apple copying anyone. There are designs that work well with phones - and to be honest, there aren't too many of them within today's technology. If something works, designers use it. There should be no better argument that software patents (in most instances) are idiotic.
  - adventured 13y ago
    Everyone should see this as Apple copying. That's what they're blatantly doing. It shouldn't be viewed negatively so long as it improves the product. There's no possibility that Apple is going to lead 100 times out of 100 on design trends. They're living up to the motto of great artists stealing. It's done in every industry, and it's done by great designers. It's a myth that great designers don't 'steal' constantly, of course they do. Ditto great musicians, and any other artists.
    - inthewind 13y ago
      That's all well and fine. Share the best bits - but don't get all prissy over anyone else doing the same.
  - dirkgently 13y ago
    >Noone should see this as Apple copying anyone. While Apple winning 600M on the same argument?
    - sbuk 13y ago
      Who have they copied? Can you illustrate it?
      - 13y ago
dirkgently 13y ago
This particular argument strikes me as coming from people who don't actually understand that Rounded Corners(TM)(R)(C) fall in the same category.
- 542458 13y ago
  I'm really sorry to drag this up again, but the "rounded corners" thing isn't really as ridiculous as some people made it sound. There are two important points here. First - Samsung was found not to infringe on design patent D'889, which is commonly criticized as the "rounded rectangles" patent. Most of the patents in the case covered other ideas ('381 patent - "rubber band" scrolling, 'D '305 patent - home screen design, '163 patent - double tap to zoom onto a specific block). The "rounded rectangles" issue had little bearing on the verdict. Second - Read patent D'889 (Please note that it isn't a regular patent, rather, it's a design patent). The patent specifically (and only) covers a touch-screen handheld tablet shaped like a rounded rectangle, with a thin bezel, edge-to-edge glass, and minimal extras, a charging port at the bottom and no stylus. It's hardly as simple as a patent on "rounded corners" - it's a patent on very specific design features, and if a single one was changed, the patent wouldn't apply (and it didn't!).
gabipurcaru 13y ago
I do agree with your arguments, yet they do have a patent on "Slide to unlock"

thezilch 13y ago

These arguments always strike me as coming from people who only spend time with Apple's designs. The folks who think that only Apple designers are leaps and bounds better, are the only thoughtful producers, and are the sole visionaries beyond just the UI. Let's face it; look to the Samsung vs. Apple case to see how it is the laymen making billion dollar calls. Not designers. It's not designers that Apple has a majority rule over.

nilliams 13y ago
>> The folks who think that only Apple designers are leaps and bounds better Parent doesn't say that at all, or make any comparisons.
- James_Duval 13y ago
  S/he's illustrating how meaningless it is to say "this is the kind of argument made by people like x", and how easily such an 'argument' can be turned on its head.
LowKarmaAccount 13y ago
>Let's face it; look to the Samsung vs. Apple case to see how it is the laymen making billion dollar calls. The damages were reduced to $600 million after the judge ruled that the jury's used an "impermissible legal theory" to award damages, and ordered a new trial.[1] The jury foreman had a technical background and lied during voir dire by failing to mention that he had history of suing others for patent abuse.[2] He was the one he told the other jurors to ignore prior art and assume that Samsung had violated the patents.[3] So it isn't fair to say that laymen decided the damages. After the trial, a patent('380, bounce-back) that Apple relied heavily upon during the trial to prove that Samsung was "infringing on their innovative designs" was invalidated by the USPTO.[3] This means that if the jury had been competent and searched for prior art (which the foreman with technical experience told them to ignore), or if Samsung had been allowed to present evidence demonstrating prior art, it is probable that no damages would have been awarded at all. [1]: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130301161659602 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130301161659602 [2]: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20121031200136965 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20121031200136965 [3]:http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130402121308772 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130402121308772
- thezilch 13y ago
  I think it's fair; I don't think you rebuke my point. Take out the foreman, and the jury is even more lay than prior and less biased, as you point out. The very nature of juries is to "educate" a lay jury, but the lawyers aren't likely designers, nor the judge, nor the USPTO. I don't disagree with the OP on there being design eras, everyone freely building atop prior art, but laymen rule the trade/dress rulings and the sales of products. The entire hoopla surrounding Apple lawsuits has to do with them insisting laymen are confused into thinking other products are "that Apple thing my daughter needs."

Geee 13y ago

No, this isn't true this time. I have been using iOS 7 on iPhone 5 for a day now, and I have mixed feelings. I have always trusted Apple to 'get it right' and be delighted with thought-out details and just no-frills great UX. I know it's Beta, but it honestly looks and feels like Android with a bit of lag here and there, some stuttering animations, confusing unlock and answer call screens, too thin fonts for my taste, icons and iconography aren't that great either (opinion), completely unnecessary eye-candy with animated parallax background which doesn't even work very well, etc. Don't get me wrong, it's not that bad, but 'leaps and bounds better', I say no. I'm sure they'll redefine the design for final product though.

LowKarmaAccount 13y ago
Have you had a chance to beta-test any of the previous iOS releases? It is possible that other iOS releases had lag issues that were fixed before the release to the general public.
- jkubicek 13y ago
  iOS 7 (beta) seems just as fast/stable as any previous beta release. iOS 4 was completely unusable on it's first release.
- Geee 13y ago
  No, I haven't tried beta releases before. I'm sure they'll get rid of all minor annoyances such as bit of lag or weird layout reflows. It was reported that they are working on the new design behind schedule, so I think this release was made in a bit of hurry.
  - epochwolf 13y ago
    All of their beta releases have had these problems. Apple betas really are betas.
    - mrgordon 13y ago
      Exactly. You should have seen the Leopard nightlies. The top bar translucency was off for a while and it was basically non-functional. The dock would crash regularly, etc.

bdt101 13y ago

Even if these are just trends, we now see Apple following trends rather than setting them. That's a significant change.

rustynails77 13y ago
Noone should see this as Apple copying anyone. There are designs that work well with phones - and to be honest, there aren't too many of them within today's technology. If something works, designers use it. There should be no better argument that software patents (in most instances) are idiotic.
- adventured 13y ago
  Everyone should see this as Apple copying. That's what they're blatantly doing. It shouldn't be viewed negatively so long as it improves the product. There's no possibility that Apple is going to lead 100 times out of 100 on design trends. They're living up to the motto of great artists stealing. It's done in every industry, and it's done by great designers. It's a myth that great designers don't 'steal' constantly, of course they do. Ditto great musicians, and any other artists.
  - inthewind 13y ago
    That's all well and fine. Share the best bits - but don't get all prissy over anyone else doing the same.
- dirkgently 13y ago
  >Noone should see this as Apple copying anyone. While Apple winning 600M on the same argument?
  - sbuk 13y ago
    Who have they copied? Can you illustrate it?
    - 13y ago

dirkgently 13y ago

This particular argument strikes me as coming from people who don't actually understand that Rounded Corners(TM)(R)(C) fall in the same category.

542458 13y ago
I'm really sorry to drag this up again, but the "rounded corners" thing isn't really as ridiculous as some people made it sound. There are two important points here. First - Samsung was found not to infringe on design patent D'889, which is commonly criticized as the "rounded rectangles" patent. Most of the patents in the case covered other ideas ('381 patent - "rubber band" scrolling, 'D '305 patent - home screen design, '163 patent - double tap to zoom onto a specific block). The "rounded rectangles" issue had little bearing on the verdict. Second - Read patent D'889 (Please note that it isn't a regular patent, rather, it's a design patent). The patent specifically (and only) covers a touch-screen handheld tablet shaped like a rounded rectangle, with a thin bezel, edge-to-edge glass, and minimal extras, a charging port at the bottom and no stylus. It's hardly as simple as a patent on "rounded corners" - it's a patent on very specific design features, and if a single one was changed, the patent wouldn't apply (and it didn't!).

gabipurcaru 13y ago

I do agree with your arguments, yet they do have a patent on "Slide to unlock"