Apple reproduces 1994 tablet to prove case against Samsung
Samsung had previously cited the Fidler Tablet as proof that Apple was not the first to conjure up a tablet with rounded corners or a flat display on the front. That did not stop Apple from going through the process of reproducing the Fidler Tablet and entering it into evidence to show how different the concept really was from Apple’s iPad.
1. Sniggly (Posts: 6478; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
The problem is that Apple has such a minimalist design that its only unique design cue on the front is the f**king home button. Samsung didn't do that with its Galaxy Tabs. So what's left? A BLACK RECTANGLE WITH CURVED EDGES.
And the Knight Ridder tablet is....A BLACK RECTANGLE WITH CURVED EDGES.
Apple can't claim minor differences makes its product unique, because that destroys its entire goddamn case against Samsung as Samsung has minor differences in its products too.
12. ardent1 (Posts: 1983; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
Perhaps you haven't read the memo on Best Buys. It is not good.
22. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
is that the one where less than 10% said they bought a Tab thinking it was an iPad? You know.. because they couldnt read the giant "samsung" logo on the box, noticed there was not fruit on the box, or knew ANYTHING about the tablet to know that it wasnt an apple like that obvious google search bar at the top of HC tablets? lol
25. gallitoking (Posts: 4630; Member since: 17 May 2011)
there is a small percent outhere that have heard of the iphone but doesnt know the iconic logo is on the back, or think that every tablet is made by Apple,
29. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
that's a very marginal %. And is that Samsung's fault they are too stupid to do the most basic research of "maybe I should see who's logo is on this box Im buying"??
no.. its not. :)
8. Savage (Posts: 431; Member since: 28 Jul 2012)
If that Fidler tablet is different than iPad, so is Galaxy Tab.
Being as vague as we can be, are we Apple?
10. sithman (banned) (Posts: 299; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
Dude shutup, and let the court decide. You post the same crap everyday... Give it a rest.
11. ardent1 (Posts: 1983; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
You are missing the point -- the iPad is revolutionary in that it doesn't have a stylus and uses multi-touch. It is common knowledge that Apple didn't invent the modern day PC tablet (that was MicroSoft). Therefore, the prior art debate isn't just a tablet per se, it's what that tablet does.
The absence of a stylus is revolutionary (and worth repeating) because it means Apple create a new interface between the user and the tablet.
14. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
actually its not. The prior art that they are fighting over is apple's "patent" that is nothing more than a drawing of a rectangle with a screen. MS's tablets did not fit that description as they were filled with buttons and odd angles. It is not a fight over functionality. Its a fight over design.
19. -box- (Posts: 3565; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
I agree with what you say, excepting the stylus. There were (and are) tablets and convertible laptops running various iterations of Windows that supported non-stylus use, but since they didn't have very large screen, using a stylus improved accuracy. What apple did was make a launcher with large fingertip-sized icons with nothing smaller than that for interaction, thus minimizing inaccuracy and the need for the accuracy of something slightly smaller than a fingertip. That said, styli are on the rebound, as folks want to be able to use them for things like Draw Something, or editing photos, or signing documents, graphic design, or even just doodles. It's what makes the Samsung Note series so remarkable in their flexibility to use either or, while offering additional benefits for improved functionality
13. rf1975 (Posts: 232; Member since: 01 Aug 2011)
I do not like Apple policy & Samsung copycat product.
Tell me, if Sony, Nokia, HTC & Motorola can make their Phone and Tablet different from Apple product, why Samsung can not. Because they just want to ride on Apple design success.
Did you check their data cable, packaging & other accessories. even they made a remote for their TV same as iPhone. Most of their product resemble Apple product. No other manufacturers did copy any product up to this extend.
16. anywherehome (Posts: 971; Member since: 13 Dec 2011)
do not lie.....rectangle with display had been before iPhone and will be after dead boring iPhone
17. rf1975 (Posts: 232; Member since: 01 Aug 2011)
You ask Samsung why they copied dead boring design of iPhone and iPad, then you will know the truth.
23. anywherehome (Posts: 971; Member since: 13 Dec 2011)
So you are able to deny existence of a rectangle with some display before iPhone or iPad? Dont you need glasses?
30. rf1975 (Posts: 232; Member since: 01 Aug 2011)
There were. But my question is is why samsung could not bring the atractive design first place by studying those rectangle before apple. I do not need glasses but it seems you need a good functioning brain.
31. jroc74 (Posts: 3977; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
If you look at Samsung's digital photo frame from 2006.....seems to me Samsung already did.
Now...the back is another story. But just looking at the front....what does that look like....
32. anywherehome (Posts: 971; Member since: 13 Dec 2011)
but I want just a rectangle with display....like car with 4 wheels.....it should be also patented?
34. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
look at samsung's entire line up. It didnt change that much before/after the iphone. They still look like Samsungs. The similarity to the iphone is mostly because they both had similar design language. If there were many adjustments to be more "iphone like" there werent many. Apple didnt create their designs in a vacuum.
15. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
exactly. memory card slot to differentiate? Well then, you just lost your own case, Apple. I hope they said that's what makes their iPad different from the older tablet, because then Samsung can use that exact statement against them.
"your honor, if all it takes for apple to feel different is the lack of a memory card slot, then the case should be excused since we have a memory card slot"
2. tedkord (Posts: 3912; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
You can't have it both ways, Apple. Either differences in size and aspect ratio matter or they don't
3. MeoCao (unregistered)
This tablet is different from iPad as much as iPad is different from SS ones.
4. cheetah2k (Posts: 737; Member since: 16 Jan 2011)
"The designer used the custom built replica to point out how the concept does not reflect the tablet described in Apple's design patent..."
Indeed it doesn't, but the Samsung Tablet does not have the same dimensional characteristics as the iPad either...
Apple you are one motherfcuking FailCake..
5. jove39 (Posts: 1206; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
When Apple loses this case Samsung should file counter petition to invalidate Apple's cheap patents...or drawing made by some random kid!
7. andro. (Posts: 1927; Member since: 16 Sep 2011)
Apples calenders seem to be stuck on April 1st continually for some reason!
18. ibap (Posts: 675; Member since: 09 Sep 2009)
When you are very minimalist, the only things you can claim as your own are ... minimal. Have they patented the use of fingers yet?
21. jaytai0106 (Posts: 822; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)
Wonder if I can still patent a car that's a box with four wheels. Then I can sue every car maker hehe
24. kingpet13 (Posts: 139; Member since: 02 Feb 2012)
How could apple exactly reproduce a tablet that never went on the market? I understand that it is based off pictures, but if you never had an actual copy you can't possibly know exactly what the look and feel of the tablet ar, even though you can come pretty darn close. SS using this as a defense is saying that it uses apple's "rectangle patent". You can tell that is a black rectangle with rounded edges. But to exactly reproduce it without help from the original creators, it is extremely likely that they got some of these smaller details wrong. I do not believe this reproduction is true unless the company that made this tablet says it is.
27. jroc74 (Posts: 3977; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Apple is hoping the jury isnt paying attention with this latest ploy....and I sure hope Samsung's lawyers are and counter this with some of whats been said in the comments here.
Some of yall in the comment section might be fine lawyers.
28. roscuthiii (Posts: 1717; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
Wait. What the f**k?! (Pardon my French.) The jury is in the deliberations phase and Apple is still out there presenting exhibits? What happened to resting their cases?
This Koh's courtroom is a travesty of justice. What ever happened to the "discovery period" restrictions?
33. jackhammeR (Posts: 1548; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)
I hate to compare but there is something in samsung's ripping off.
Really. Look at the first galaxy (the phone) and even now, samsung galaxy mini. Both of them look like an iphone. Inspiration? Ok, but to some extent.
Tablets? I think that samsung purposely "borrowed" many elements from apple hoping for get on the apple wave of popularity.
Apple couldn't keep their hair on any longer and that's the beginning of this stupid war.
it's not about its "squarish" or "being more rectangular or less".
It's all about design and how far the other companies are allowed to go to compete fair play.
Anyway, I have to admit that it should be solved a long time ago and those trials are like a reality show.
The sad thing is that it hurt most us, users.
35. flamencoguy (Posts: 82; Member since: 04 Aug 2012)
Every company should patent the smallest little computer action/function(phones, tablets and PCs etc) to protect themselves from Apple and also sue them if they dare to copy any little gadget. DO NOT DEMO any new technology to Apple.
Take your lessons from Xerox Palo Alto Labs did, like Mitsubishi (Diamond Touch) did.
Dare to be different from them. There are many ways to do things. Patent your ideas.
Apple aint the only innovator around. They certainly did not invent 2G or 3G or 4G functionality. Go to 5G and leave them in the dust !!
Thay got away with murder as far as I am concerned. Just remember "slide to unlock", "snap back", rectangular and rounded corners is all they can do. They call this IP.
Very sophisticated stuff ain't it?