News Forum Phone database

> New Topic
> Topic Locked
Esato Forum Index > Manufacturer Discussion > Samsung > From iPhone to Galaxy Nexus - How is the Android experience compared to iOS? Bookmark topic

The thing which concerns me at the moment as always is Apple's megalomaniac attitude in attempting to stop everyone else doing anything. How ? see todays news:

Apple granted yet another patent, forces everyone else to cough up. Everyone !

If this is their way of getting my custom, by forcing me to buy their phones because nobody else can offer what i want because of Apple's throw money at it to buy your custom attitude, they can stick their iDevices up their unmentionbles.

After reading this news, Apple have made me angry yet again !!


This is exactly what companies like Sky do, they buy rights to tv shows which then you can only get on Sky. For example, the Lost series, which were aired on UK terrestrial tv years ago and then when season 3 came around, i would have to fork out £40 a month for a Sky subscription. So i refuse, i'd rather go without. Everytime i get stopped in the street or in the supermarket by Sky salesmen, i tell them to off, with a specific four letter word prior to it.

Apple are the very same. I actually think i now hate Apple.
--
Posted: 2011-11-17 23:09:20
Edit : Quote


Don't get me started on this crApple are to me nothing special. So in their world everyone should pack in now & give up??
--
Posted: 2011-11-17 23:14:24
Edit : Quote


Even though your comment is very anti-Apple, and im sure Masseur will be here any moment to do the usual Apple defence comments, its very true.

Apple enraged me in July'10 when they attempted to downplay and deny their antenna issues with the 4. They enraged me again when they got the Galaxy Tab banned across europe, which then only took place in Germany. Only now can Samsung sell their Android tab there now its been redesigned. They enraged me yet again several more times during this past 6 months with their continuous court battles. Some would argue its tit-for-tat and Samsung et al are all doing the same, but really Apple started the ball rolling and have filed the most legal complaints to get their competitors products banned or at least with lesser features.

They enraged me again only last month with their pathetic 4S upgrade, or lack of. Same screen, same lack of features, same speech about how great their product is. Siri ? its the same product as Vlingo but just developed a bit more. They talk like they invented the wheel !

And now this news i posted, where Apple apparently could file suits against everyone who has location based services which literally applies to every software house and hardware manufacturer out there.

Apple need to do one and stick to making iPods, at least they were virgin products which made Apple look innocent. As time goes on with each new iteration of iDevices, Apple come across more and more as big fat cats who are so greedy and want to pay to bully their way to success.

Rant over. Final straw. I hate Apple.

--
Posted: 2011-11-17 23:30:09
Edit : Quote


And all the Apple fans buy it like lambs to the slaughter. It annoys me when they try to stop Samsung selling a product of theirs cos it MAY look similar.
--
Posted: 2011-11-17 23:51:03
Edit : Quote


Apple is always acting like they have invented everything and too many people are stupid enough to believe them

--
Posted: 2011-11-17 23:51:07
Edit : Quote




Genuine question - did you own an iPhone 4 at that time? We're you personally affected by those issues? If not, isn't it a little odd to be "enraged" by something you haven't actually experienced? Were you enraged by the offer of a full refund to anyone who *was* actually affected, or were you secretly more "enraged" at the fact that few took them up on that offer, and the phone went on to be a massive success?



What should really enrage anyone interested in technology is how blatantly companies like Samsung trade in knock-offs of other peoples designs and ideas. Before you protest at that, accept the fact that the ONLY reason Apple keep winning these suits, and successfully "banning" products, is because the various courts of law in various countries wholly accept that Samsung has violated these patents - and Samsung's tit for tat response has not had the same affect because they simply don't have a leg to stand on. If Apple's such an evil behemoth and the likes of Samsung are so great, then why don't they come up with something great on their own WITHOUT handing yet another court victory to Apple?



Again a bizarre choice of phrase about a product you evidently had no intention of buying even if the 4S had been designed by the gods themselves and welded out of Martian steel. What do you care? It adds a dual core processor, 1080p video and the best camera on any phone, but to you it's a pathetic upgrade to a phone you've no experience of interest in anyway. Big deal - what is there to be enraged about? Did you Apple stocks dip that day? I'm pretty sure they've bounced back now.



Siri is the same product as, well, Siri, an iPhone app which predates Vlingo - but yeah, "developed a bit more". Which is a nice understated way to describe software that's much better than other software. Is it the invention of the wheel? No of course not, but it's the first time anything like this has been integrated so deeply into an OS or executed so well - one of the head guys at Google is on record as saying it's "not that useful" which is a perfectly valid point of view, time will tell how useful Apple's competitors think it is a year or two down the track when they traditionally start to catch up.



If you stopped to read and understand the article you'd know that Apple didnt create that patent themselves - it was already patented by another company. Meaning that other company already had the power to sue every other software and hardware manufacturer out there INCLUDING Apple, who obviously make ample use of location services in their products and would have been prime target for a suit. All Apple did was take the sensible step of protecting themselves by buying the patent outright, and upfront, meaning they can't be sued themselves. If Google or whoever are that worried about being sued, maybe they should have bought the patent.
--
Posted: 2011-11-18 00:13:56
Edit : Quote


WoW im scared to step foot in here
--
Posted: 2011-11-18 00:14:17
Edit : Quote




Oh come on,Apple have stolen MANY ideas or rather COPIED many ideas from others that other manufacturers did YEARS ago
--
Posted: 2011-11-18 00:19:08
Edit : Quote


WoW im scared to step foot in here

I 5/5 agree and disagree whats been put in here from other members.
however I have the best of both phones and from the 2 there very similar
iPhone doesn't want to download music from Google search link though which makes me sad at times
but tracks are 79p so its not that bad!

Android sure you have widgetys, animated wallpapers etc
a little more freedom but there actually pretty similar devices

so personally lovemm both

im not a fangirl either before you question that I just like the use of high end devices
--
Posted: 2011-11-18 00:21:45
Edit : Quote


The iPhone is a complete copy of the phone, the person who invented the phone should sue them! The market doesn't work that way, take a kettle when Mr Bob got the idea to make it electrical and move the handle on the side for easy pouring etc. shouldn't he be a billionaire by now? It doesn't work like that, and I could go on but tbh I cannot be bothered any more I've made my points clear (read back though the thread if you're interested ) so here is a pretty good article i'm gonna' stick in here by Wayne Rash:

Steve Jobs’ description of Android as ‘stolen’ is unfair, but his anger that Google developed its own mobile OS knew no bounds, says Wayne Rash

One of the many revelations in the biography of Steve Jobs from author Walter Isaacson is Jobs’ assertion that Android was a “stolen product.” According to Hayley Tsukayama’s report in The Washington Post, Jobs was furious about Android and vowed to spend all of Apple’s cash to destroy it. The problem is Jobs was wrong about Android. Or if he’s right, then the iPhone was also a stolen product.

The reason that Steve Jobs was wrong is fairly simple to see if you’ve watched technology product development over the years. Nearly every product grows on the work done before it and the iPhone (and iPod Touch) are no exception. Apple created a very nice design for the iPhone, a design that was innovative, included new ways of doing things and most of all was attractive. But the iPhone was a derivative of other products, and while it was an improvement over what came before it (as it should be), it still depended on the ideas developed in those earlier products.
Apple was not the first

You have to ask yourself what it was that Jobs thought made Android a stolen product. Was it the user interface of icons on a screen that launched applications when touched? Palm had that feature years before Apple ever had a phone. Was it the touch-screen? Palm had that, too. Was it the third-party applications? Several handheld devices had that long before the iPhone, including some Windows-driven phones as well as those from Palm. Was it the integration of email and the personal digital assistant? There were a lot of those out there, too, including the BlackBerry devices.

So what exactly is it that Jobs thinks Android took from Apple? The sleek look of the device? Can you patent that? The thin profile? The touch keyboard? Apple didn’t invent any of those things, although the company’s designers did a masterful job of integrating them into a single product. Perhaps, it was the ability to play music on your device? Nope, Apple wasn’t first with that, either.

So why is it that Steve Jobs was so willing to blow his company’s cash reserves on an endless marketing and legal campaign to destroy this product? Was it perhaps a statement of Steve Jobs’ famous temperament? Perhaps it was his belief that only Apple could have good ideas? It’s hard to tell now that Jobs is gone, but Jobs was famous for his temperament as related by Doug Hardy in Forbes.
Jobs ‘s vendetta

In reality, the iPhone, as nice as it is, is derivative of the products that preceded it in the market. While Apple did a beautiful job of the user interface, and made a device that’s attractive enough to garner a gazillion followers and an ecosystem that was just closed enough to control while being open enough to gain a great deal of external support, the iPhone still depended on the work of others.

This is true of Apple’s products in general. As nice as the original Macintosh may have been, it depended on Xerox for the original design for the interface. As nice as the Apple II may have been, it too was based on predecessors. But this isn’t to suggest that the Macintosh or the Apple II were bad computers or that they shouldn’t have been developed using the concepts of others. There really is no alternative.

Despite Apple’s claims of uniqueness, the company couldn’t have been completely unique if it expected to actually sell computers. Apple didn’t invent computing after all. The company simply developed software using a different approach from what was emerging elsewhere at the time. Of course, Apple insisted on using a closed platform. The company refused, except for a brief time, to allow clones of its product. And when clones did appear, Apple put them out of business.

I suspect that the only reason Apple escaped the interest of the US Justice Department is that the market share at the time was so small that it would be hard to prove anti-competitive behaviour. But the fact is that Apple could never have existed if not for the ideas and creations of other companies. And there’s nothing wrong with that.
Shifting the bar

For technology to exist at all, it can’t possibly be invented afresh every time. Great products depend on earlier ones that manage to move the state of the art forward. They depend on other changes in other technologies, and they depend on a vast range of ideas beyond the reach of any single company or any single person. Likewise, designs grow from other designs from other places. And companies that believe that their designs are somehow unique and divorced from everything are deluding themselves.

So why was it that Jobs was so irate about Android? Was it because Android came from the company run by Eric Schmidt, one of his board members? I’m sure that Jobs’ sense of betrayal was rooted in this and in his belief that he was the only one who had great ideas. But the fact is that the world is full of great ideas. What Apple did was take some of those great ideas and execute them very well. That in itself is great enough. You don’t need to denigrate others who do the same. And when Jobs did that, he diminished himself in the process."

--
Posted: 2011-11-18 00:24:21
Edit : Quote

---

New Topic   Topic Locked

Forum Index