Samsung exec: we didn’t copy Apple’s iPhone, we just had better marketing

By , Apr 14, 2014

Samsung Corporate HQ (image 001)

Apple is claiming in the latest patent trial on-going in a California court that Samsung ripped off its iPhone to become the top-smartphone maker in the world, while Samsung says it was just pure marketing genius that helped turn the smartphone tide over the years.

Todd Pendleton, the chief marketing officer for Samsung’s American division, became the first Samsung executive to take the stand on Monday in the latest patent spat. He explained that marketing Samsung’s phones as the “Next Big Thing” helped it beat Apple, HTC, and BlackBerry, who in 2011 all held a lead over the South Korean electronics giant.

“I think people knew Samsung for televisions,” Pendleton told the court, when reminiscing on 2011. “But in terms of smartphones, there was no recognition for what our product was or what it stood for.”

In 2011, Samsung saw how much it was being dominated by Apple, and changed the way it marketed itself as a result. At the time Samsung was pushing itself on carriers, and instead found that it needed to explain to customers that it wasn’t just a television company, and was now making smartphones to compete with Apple.

The New York Times, who was present at the trial on Monday, reports Pendleton said that with each new iPhone that goes on sale, Galaxy smartphone sales drop around the same time. This is why in an email with Dale Sohn, the former smartphone boss at Samsung, Sohn said: “There will be a tsunami when iPhone 5 is coming,” and that Samsung needed to find a way to fight it. Marketing was that way.

We’ve seen countless advertisements where Samsung mocks Apple, and claims superiority over design, features, and innovation. That’s what helped Samsung overtake Apple as the top smartphone manufacturer when it released the Galaxy S III. claims Pendleton – not stealing patents.

“No one’s accused your marketing or advertising program of infringing any patents,” Apple lawyer Bill Lee told Pendleton, according to Recode, suggesting Samsung ripped patents from Apple with its Galaxy line.

Who’s correct in their stance? It depends on who you ask.

Samsung designer Youngmi Kim, who has been on the team since 2004, said Samsung “absolutely” didn’t copy Apple, while on the stand Monday.

“If we were to work on the same thing as Apple, that would not give us any advantage in terms of differentiating our products, so that would not make any sense,” Kim said.

Apple has had several witnesses on the stand during the trial over the last few weeks, including Phil Schiller, the marketing boss at the Cupertino-based company. It was revealed in emails shown as evidence that Schiller was once worried about Samsung’s advertising, and what it could do to Apple’s position in the market.

“We have a lot of work to do to turn this around,” Schiller wrote in a January 2013 email to James Vincent at Media Arts Laboratories, a company that has served as Apple’s ad agency since 1997.

This is the second patent trial between Samsung and Apple to take place in the US, following a trial in August 2012 where Apple came out victorious, and Samsung was made to pay $1.049 billion in damages.

  • Share:
  • Follow:
  • F25VS

    Just by looking at what is shown right here, it seems that the way samsung talks is like what a child would say…”Just Advertising,” wherein Apple has actual proof.

    • Maxim∑

      I guess there is a reason while Apple usually always wins in court. I don’t hate Google or Android but Samsung………………………

      • https://twitter.com/MrElectrifyer MrElectrifyer

        It’s ’cause it’s in America, and Apple’s an American company. A similar lawsuit was discarded in the Netherlands due to proof of prior existence.

      • Maxim∑

        I think Samsung “won” at one point but Obama had vetoed it lol…

      • rattyuk

        They “won” because Samsung were attempting to double dip on royalties for Apple using a Qualcomm chip the purchase of which already covered the royalty payments. The reason Apple held off any payments was that Samsung’s demands were based on the final selling price of the device.

        That is like saying the cost of a piece of furniture differs depending on the price of the house it is going into.

      • https://twitter.com/MrElectrifyer MrElectrifyer

        Uhm, wtf do you think Apple’s “30% cut” does? That’s the license agreement, and if Apple is too hard-headed to accept it, who’s to blame?

      • rattyuk

        The point being Samsung’s license terms were on FRAND terms, Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory terms.

        Samsung allows chipmakers to make chips and charges them a percentage of their chip sales for an ongoing license. So they tap anyone who makes a phone by getting money on each chip sold.

        Save in the case of Apple they revoked that deal and asked other chip makers to not work with them. That, at the very least seems the very definition of discriminatory to me.

    • @dongiuj

      Oh come on! I have 5 iPhones an iPad and 2 galaxy phones in my house. Personally I don’t care which company wins. To me both companies sound childish, apple a little more, but I think that the fans of both companies are even more childish by whining all the time about whatever. As long as I’m happy with the product that I chose then that’s all that matters. I couldn’t care less who made what as long as the consumer gets what the consumer pays for. I think that both companies and the fans need to man-up.

      • Batman

        Shamesung has fans? Are they just trolls hired/paid by Shamesung? Like 50 cents for every (positive) comment for them.

      • @dongiuj

        You have just proved my point…”the fans of both companies are even more childish”.

      • Batman

        Read the news, kid.

      • @dongiuj

        “Kid”?! Ok, ok, you’ve already proved me right once. You don’t have to continue, BATMAN…

      • dan

        y u do dis to botman

      • diggitydang

        I guess you’ve never invented anything before… because if you did and someone copied it, I think you’d care…

      • @dongiuj

        Tell me something that has been “invented” that everyone uses and that has yet to be copied. Please tell me.

      • diggitydang

        Ok, “invented” might have been the wrong choice of word… BUT, I look around the room and a Dyson bladeless fan was the only one of its kind until recently, when I believe the patent expired. But, I totally respect that creation by Dyson and would feel the same way if someone just copied what they did (ie. before the patent expired) and said that they thought about creating fans without blades exactly the same way that Dyson did. Now, I’m sure that various technologies were combined to create the final product… they didn’t invent a motor, for example… they didn’t invent anything really… they just put together some cool technologies to invent a fan that doesn’t have blades. Pretty awesome.

        In the same was as a typical fan existed before Dyson, the smartphone existed as well, via Blackberry. But Apple came along and reinvented it… and you can see the stark difference in older Blackberries and Apple’s iPhone. However, you can’t see nearly as much of a difference in Apple’s iPhone and the SGS series.

      • @dongiuj

        Basically, like you said, Dyson made a vacuum cleaner and a fan in a different way and now other companies see its popularity and make similar products. Apple made a phone in a different way, other companies see its popularity and make similar products. That is business and that has always been business. These companies need to deal with that otherwise don’t get involved in business. I’m not rooting for apple (I think you can see that) and I’m not rooting for samsung. I root for no tech company. I like tech things and if I’m happy with what I have purchased, like I said I couldn’t care less which company made it. People come up with ideas and other people feed off of that. That’s life so companies need to deal with that and fans seriously need to get over it, man-up and get a life.
        If you don’t agree, that’s fine. Everyone’s welcome to their own opinions, right? Peace.

      • @dongiuj

        I just wrote a reply but I can’t see it here yet. Not sure what’s happened but in the end I wrote something like, I don’t care who makes what. I’m not rooting for any company. What’s happening to all companies is that somebody makes something, other people see its popularity and everyone feeds off of that. That’s life, companies need to deal with that and fans of companies need to get over it, man-up and get a life. If you don’t agree, that’s fine, everyone has their own opinions, right? Peace.

      • diggitydang

        I respect your opinion, but the whole premise behind a patent is so people don’t copy ideas, ultimately rewarding innovation. Why would any company want to throw millions/billions of dollars into R&D if someone is allowed to just piggyback off of that research? I think at the end of the day, the consumer actually suffers. But, that’s just my opinion too. Cool, cool… have a good day man…

      • 3smat

        We’re talking about innovations here, not inventions. LOL

      • https://twitter.com/MrElectrifyer MrElectrifyer

        Yeah I’d care if it were my invention, not something I copied from someone else. Know something they (Apple) actually invented?

      • F25VS

        Apple Invented:
        -The first computer with an actual graphical interface
        -The first “SMART” smartphone
        -The things that make iOS what it is now (which some stuff samsung copied)

      • Hyr3m

        - You mean an interface using a pointing device called “mouse” ? That was Xerox…
        - the iPhone is neither “smart” (doesn’t have an AI) nor the first “smartphone”
        - The things that make iOS what it is now where taken from Microsoft (windows 8′s flatness), Android (notification center, quick toggles), and the jailbreak community.

        Go back to school.

      • Umut Bilgiç

        Wow.. You really cant understand. According to you, nothing is pure innovation. Pure innovation exists. If no one before Apple did it like Apple did it, then Apple innovated the way they do it. Simple enough?

        You are confused, we are talking about innovation not invention.

      • gittlopctbi

        Did you mean to reply to Hyr3m? Because your comment makes no sense to his post, if so.

      • Umut Bilgiç

        Huh? I replied to him, yes.. But I dont get why it wouldnt make sense anyways

      • Hyr3m

        Wow.. You really can’t read. Seriously though, look at the message I replied to : “Apple Invented:”. No they didn’t invent that stuff.

        Patents are about inventions. Patent infringement is using someone else’s invention without their consent.

        But if you want to talk about innovation, let’s talk about innovation.
        Of course Apple innovated with their first iPhone; they were the first ones to make a phone without a physical keypad (as far as I know) and to use multitouch in such a device…

        Gotta give back to Caesar what belongs to Caesar.

        A lot of things attributed to Apple have been seen before though… almost every mobile device company has had their own specific and unified OS design, user experience, intuitive interface etc… Nokia was well known for that back in the day…

      • Bradley Culbertson

        Apple bought the patents from Xerox, who invented it doesn’t matter. They willingly agreed into a contract.

      • Hyr3m

        Apple bought the patents from Xerox[citation needed]
        They willingly agreed into a contract.[citation needed]

        Please keep pulling stuff out of your @ss, it makes the whole conversation smell so good !

      • Bradley Culbertson

        I wasn’t trying to get specific and this is my last post on the subject, but basically Xerox was given stock options as payments for the intellectual property. Apple may have been assertive with xerox but none of that matters because apple was allowed to use the technology no one could legally stop them.

      • Bradley Culbertson

        If u want citations take your own time try the Steve jobs bio or wiki it if u want a quick reference. Later

      • Hyr3m

        Even if there was licensing from Xerox, that still doesn’t mean Apple invented it (which was F25VS’ initial assertion).

        And even that is not true. It’s not Xerox but SRI who patented the mouse (Douglas Engelbart’s employer), it was later licensed to Apple for 40k.

        Still utterly irrelevant to the case though.

      • gittlopctbi

        I think we can also make a pretty good list of ideas that iOS “borrowed,” “stole,” “mimicked,” “emulated” (take your pick of word) from Android.

        “The first computer with an actual graphical interface” Oh, my…you must be too young to remember/know about Xerox.

      • diggitydang

        That thinking basically says that raw materials are the only thing that should be trademarked because everything comes from something else. Apple put together a combination of things that already existed to reinvent something else. Samsung copied that same recipe to do the same thing.

      • https://twitter.com/MrElectrifyer MrElectrifyer

        Nope, that is saying only the end-product of a recipe should be patented. Apple copied ingredients from multiple locations to make the iPhone, iPad and Mac, yet they still patented those ingredients (i.e. stole them) instead of just the end-product.

        Samsung too copied multiple ingredients from Apple and other competitors, but we don’t see them suing others as-if they were the inventors of those ingredients.

      • Rowan09

        Hey man if one company use another company illegally to make billions I would be in court too. Microsoft gets paid royalties from HTC, Google, Samsung, etc but when Apple tries to do the same it’s wrong? I don’t know who’s right and I don’t really care but Samsung absolutely became relevant after the release of the iPhone. Whether that’s just a huge coincidence is yet to be seen.

      • https://twitter.com/MrElectrifyer MrElectrifyer

        “but when Apple tries to do the same it’s wrong”

        It’d be the same if it were actually Apple’s invention. Not the case here…

      • Rowan09

        We all know it doesn’t matter who invents it, it’s the person or business that owns the IP. Samsung wins regardless of the verdict because they made billions after the release of the iPhone. Whether it’s a coincidence, I don’t know.

      • JT

        Thats whats wrong with the system. The IP should only be about actual inventions. Design, shapes and reinventing shouldnt be in there. And thats why we got a broken system today that pretty much force companies to goto court.

      • gittlopctbi

        I knew it wouldn’t take long for someone to prove your point about the childish whiners.

      • @dongiuj

        It’s inevitable.

      • @dongiuj

        It’s inevitable.

    • https://twitter.com/MrElectrifyer MrElectrifyer

      Apple’s sounding more like a hypocritical child, ’cause there’s actual proof that what Apple is claiming to be their invention is just another ingredient they stole from a diversified number of competitors and patented. Don’t mind them copying one another; there wouldn’t be competition if that weren’t the case…

      • rattyuk

        And all Samsung’s supporters are basically saying “This stuff should be free”…

        It isn’t. Get over it.

      • https://twitter.com/MrElectrifyer MrElectrifyer

        And all Apple supporters are basically saying “Apple should own exclusive right to this stuff even though they didn’t invent it”.

        They shouldn’t. Get over it.

      • rattyuk

        Unfortunately for you the court disagreed last time. Let’s see what happens this time then.

      • https://twitter.com/MrElectrifyer MrElectrifyer

        It’s American; where money has priority over morals. There’s a reason why this BS was thrown out of court in the Netherlands…

      • Rowan09

        Apple won in Germany and while you can say Apple may win because it’s America, Samsung won overseas because it’s not America. If they did infringe on Apples patents pay them royalties, it’s just that simple. Samsung is just stalling, even if Apple gets the 2 billion it’s requesting Samsung still wins for brand recognition. Microsoft gets paid royalties from Google, HTC, Samsung, etc so maybe Apple should also get some money.

      • JT

        Apple also lost prior in germany, uk and netherlands. How many times has apple lost in america? none?

      • Rowan09

        Apple won once in America but the case is still ongoing and they are not getting paid what they wanted. Who cares how many times they lost in America. Samsung won in South Korea, it’s just the nature of the game.

      • JT

        Samsung actually lost in south korea

      • leart

        Now you care about apple moral? Hahaha

      • http://facebook.com/kurtlewisart Kurt

        -1
        quit trolling this guy

      • JT

        The american court system has been broken for a long time. Its a joke really

      • F25VS

        You accidentally placed a period in-between shouldn’t and get…

      • leart

        Your talking to a troll, don’t waste your time with this garbage of mrelectrifulyer

      • gittlopctbi

        Ah! So now anyone that isn’t a Fanboy and seems to like Samsung is a troll. OK, got it.

      • leart

        Its not like that, its like, example, I dont like Samsung and i spend all my time writing negative comment on a samsung fan page or blog. If I do that I would be a stupid without anything to do in life, or a hater, or a spammer.. And those two Mrelectrifyer and Kurt are not looking like idiots, for me are spammers..
        And its we’ll know that samsung spammers are all around the internet, and the main target is apple

      • leart

        Don’t waste your time with payed trolls like this Mrelectrifyer, Internet is full with this kind of payed “fan” against apple

      • leart

        If you want to be honest, admit first that you hate or you are payed to bad mouth apple, and then speak. Your hate against apple seems to me like advanced samsung marketing

    • Hyr3m

      Where’s the proof ? The only thing Apple has put forward is “Look, we didn’t get the (illegal) monopoly we wanted to have…”

      Samsung ≠ Google

  • rattyuk

    Ina Fried reporting from the court:
    “Lockheimer testified that Android, too, was the product of long hours and hard work.
    “The hours were pretty grueling,” Lockheimer said, speaking of the early days of Android as the operating system was being developed in 2006 and 2007. “They continue to be grueling, by the way. … We work really hard.””

    Gruber’s response:
    “This testimony defies credulity. Consider the timeline. As Daniel Dilger documents in a report today for AppleInsider looking at Android design documents entered as evidence in the trial, in August 2006, the draft Android 1.0 design document mandated up/down/left/right/select hardware buttons and explicitly stated that touchscreens would not be supported. Then, the very next revision of the specification, in April 2007 — a draft described as a “major update” — multitouch touchscreens became mandatory. In August 2006 Android was planned as a BlackBerry/Windows Mobile style hardware-button platform with no initial support for touchscreens. In April 2007 it became a platform where multitouch touchscreens were mandatory.”

    • Hyr3m

      Samsung didn’t create Android – case dismissed.

      • F25VS

        touchwiz (if thats how you spell it) is the one copying Apple… not Andriod

      • Hyr3m

        Where did you mention touchwiz in your previous comment ? You talked about Android 1.0 then “a major update” for android… then once more android and android and also android. No mention of touchwiz or anything Samsung-made in the whole quote.

      • rattyuk

        Pretty certain Samsung copied Apple’s slide to unlock for TouchWiz. Here is some Samsung information to back it up.

        Samsung:
        In contrast, the team presented Apple’s solution under the heading “creative ways of solving UI complexity,” noting, “swiping unlock on the screen allows to prevent erroneous unlock even without using hard key and users find it fun to swipe (iPhone).”
        Samsung’s design team offered two alternative unlock mechanisms, one that required users to tap the screen, then drag a virtual dog ear to reveal the home screen, and the other that similarly involved an initial tap and then a dragging down of the screen from the top of the display.
        However, Samsung didn’t use one of these two unlock alternatives. Instead, it simply copied what Apple had come up with as part of a design process that the company documented for various models under development.
        Samsung noted that with Apple’s iPhone “unlocking standard is precise as it is handled through sliding, and it allows prevention of any wrong motion.”
        The solution Samsung saw: “same as iPhone, clarify the unlocking standard by sliding.”

      • Hyr3m

        Again, where did you mention touchwiz in your previous comment ?

        You have to slide to unlock on Android… same thing… and it’s different enough from Apple’s slide to unlock because you can do it in different directions.

        A gesture on a touchscreen does not deserve or warrant a patent. It’s seriously f*cking pathetic. If that patent is found to be infringed upon it’s going to demonstrate that this “court of law” is a joke.

        Blackberry’s unlock is a “swipe up”… I don’t see them getting in trouble…

        Also, Nokia pretty much ripped off the exact “Apple way of unlocking” :

      • http://facebook.com/kurtlewisart Kurt

        I said it before, I’ll say it again. You need to write some articles for IDB.

      • Hyr3m

        <3

        I'm not sure iFans would like a heretic like me to write entries on their favorite Apple-related blog ^^

      • http://facebook.com/kurtlewisart Kurt

        Just mention here and there about how good Steve Jobs farts smelled and you’ll be good in their book

      • Hyr3m

        xD

      • Hyr3m

        Would that count ?

        How good they smelled ? Not very… :D

      • http://facebook.com/kurtlewisart Kurt

        Well, just don’t mention he is worm food!

    • JT

      So whats the main point? They didnt work really hard and spent hours on it? Dont really see what grubers response had anything to do with Lockheimer

      • rattyuk

        Lockheimer was basically caught lying in court.

        Sohn was the same, btw:
        Apple atty asks Sohn if he followed Apple’s intro of iPhone. He says no – co does normal benchmarking every day. Apple whips out a doc that has a “message from Dale” in it. It’s a planning doc for Samsung from April 2012. In the note, Sohn said: “Beating Apple is no longer merely an objective. It is our survival strategy.”

        Another Samsung Exec caught lying in court.

  • jack

    Scamsung is ashamed to be asian.. they always use blonde characters in their ads and keynotes. Because we all know asians make most of the knockoffs, ripped and pirated products. Smart marketing indeed…

    • https://twitter.com/MrElectrifyer MrElectrifyer

      Take your racism somewhere else, jackass.

      • ✪ aidan harris ✪

        It’s not racism it’s reality with proof to back it up. I’m sure that not everything that is churned out of the Asia market is a clone or fake but a good majority of the produce that is produced is…

      • Kash Gummaraju

        Just because the majority of the advertising you see are the ads in the western “white dominated” nations have only white people does not mean that they only use white people.Go to India and the Samsung ads have Indian people, go to Asia and the people in the ad are Asian. That is racism, not reality. Even though most of knockoff news comes from Asia, a bigger knockoff and ripoff in disguise is sold throughout the world, the iPhone.

      • ✪ aidan harris ✪

        ” bigger knockoff and ripoff in disguise is sold throughout the world, the iPhone.”
        I don’t know what you’ve consumed to make you think that but you’re wrong there. Apple invented multi-touch so if you think about it every non-Apple smartphone is a knockoff / rip-off of the original iPhone (of course this rip-off feature is acceptable since it’s an industry standard feature)

      • https://twitter.com/MrElectrifyer MrElectrifyer

        “Apple invented multi-touch”

        BS. They just absorbed the inventors, Fingerworks. That’s like saying I invented the iPhone 4S ’cause I bought it…

      • ✪ aidan harris ✪

        Which is true. If you bought Apple you would not be incorrect stating that you invented the iPhone 4S…

      • Hyr3m

        Wow, just WOW ! So if you marry a woman with 3 kids from a previous marriage, the kids’ DNA changes to match yours?

      • leart

        Take your trolls comments somewhere else, your not agains racism your pro spamsung

      • https://twitter.com/MrElectrifyer MrElectrifyer

        So, in other words, if you support Samsung in any shape or form, you’re not against racism…that’s a new era of iDiocracy, congratulations, you’re the lead of that era.

      • http://facebook.com/kurtlewisart Kurt

        Stop trolling. You’re being obsessed with @MrElectrifyer:disqus

      • leart

        haha, i am sure you liked what he wrote :))

      • @dongiuj

        Oh my god! What is WRONG with you?!

      • leart

        oh my god, your a horse

      • @dongiuj

        Wild stallion actually. I see that you’re a bike….where I come from that means you’re a girly slut.

      • leart

        Haha another squalid spamsgund troll. Thats i love apple more and more and more..

      • @dongiuj

        It’s like you’re trying say something but nobody understands you.

      • leart

        I love apple, every body here on this web site understand this except trolls

      • @dongiuj

        Grow up for F¥€|< sake! Enough, child. You're yet another person proving my point about childish sissy fangirls of companies.

      • leart

        I LOVE APPLE
        In my country all men’s use apple the most, gays and girls use samsung and nexus.
        Now sorry troll I have works to do, you can continue your mission against apple lovers here in this web page.
        Bye

      • @dongiuj

        You’re too young to work! I haven’t mentioned anything about me being against apple. You should read everything I have said in the comments on this article. Or maybe you’re having trouble reading. Now good luck growing up and getting a life. Ok? Bye bye now.

      • @dongiuj

        “Men’s”? You can’t double plural a word, idiot.

      • leart

        Where I am from if you say something similar face to face youll be dead , but of corse in Internet you can offend me, no problem I dont care, LOVE APPLE

      • @dongiuj

        Listen to yourself. You really have no idea how much of a fool you sound and most probably are. “Love apple”….do you even have a life? Everyone would say “No, you don’t”. It’s the people like you that give a company a bad name. It’s people like that make other people hate a company. It’s just a tech company, chill the F¥€|< out and stop trying to act like a big boy threatening people on the internet. It's not big and it's not clever.

    • http://173.58.214.169/ Anthony3595

      Not all asians copy

      • F25VS

        I have korean classmates and they are always the “bully” in class, plus they have the lowest grades in the list, but also cheats from time to time (even after they were warned). That means to say that koreans only succeed when they copy.

      • Hyr3m

        What about 100% Korean class rooms in Korea ? Who do they copy from ?

        Please take your racist logical fallacies elsewhere, numbnuts.

      • F25VS

        They use their samsungs… maybe. But this is how it works here in my class… and by the way I am asian

      • Hyr3m

        Still racist logical fallacies…

      • F25VS

        What’s wrong with you? Are you brainwashed by samsung?

      • Hyr3m

        Basing a generalizing statement like “koreans only succeed when they copy” on anecdotal evidence “my classmates…” is a form of fallacy.

        What’s your aim in making such a comment? Are you 12 years old or something?

        This has nothing to do with Samsung or Apple.

        Samsung has non-Korean employees and I’m pretty sure Apple has Korean employees…

    • @dongiuj

      Are you Asian?

    • n0ahcruz3

      The ignorance is strong with this one..

    • gittlopctbi

      “Scamsung is ashamed to be asian.. they always use blonde characters in their ads and keynotes”

      Yeah, and what Asian company (Toyota, Honda, Yamaha, etc. etc.) uses Asian models in US ads?

  • Biscuit

    Yeah, because the whole “status bar changing colour within apps” in the new touchwiz isn’t from iOS7… Come on Samsung. Seriously?

    • Kash Gummaraju

      it isn;t

      • Biscuit

        How it changes to the same colour the apps interface is in? Where is it from? Thought it was from iOS

      • Kash Gummaraju

        Nope, it came from various apps, such as Pandora where the app itself would change color to match the music.

      • Kash Gummaraju

        and also stuff like Xpose on Cyanogenmod

      • Biscuit

        Yeah that’s still in beta. I’ve used that before. But I can definitely say that iOS7 was out before that module appeared.

      • Biscuit

        I wasn’t aware of that. I assumed that in order to change the status bar colour, Apple’s software first needs to allow it. Thanks for the info! Was curious to know where that originated from.

    • http://facebook.com/kurtlewisart Kurt

      Samsung copies for sure. So does Apple. The latter just won’t be discussed on this website. And who cares. We have nothing to do with them. We are meaningless to them. They want your money thats it. They don’t care about you.

    • http://173.58.214.169/ Anthony3595

      You mean iOS 6? It had color changing status bars.

  • leart

    Ahahaha even my grandpa knows that samsung copied apple almost in everything…

  • Qasim

    Marketing isnt even the point here , samsung infringed the patents or not? Thats the question and just like an guilty person who when asked if he did it or not, they start talking about somethoing else.

    • Hyr3m

      Just like the so-called expert called in by Apple that started talking about how the maybe-infringement had detrimental effects on the monopoly Apple is trying to achieve, instead of talking about the patents…

      • Qasim

        Ok so this is what i think you’re saying: the expert apple brought in who figured out how much samsung should pay did not talked about the infringed patents, instead he discussed the negative effects of those infringments on the monopoly apple was trying to achieve? Is this what you’re saying? Just to be clear

      • Hyr3m

        You can read your comment and mine again if you’re not sure about what I’m saying. It’s written right there for everyone to see…

        So, because of my wording, you’re planning on going with “you’re implying the expert should have talked about the patents and infringement however he’s not a technical expert but an expert about the market and (only) knows about the financial implications of the copyright infringement”.

        What I was saying is, just like your “marketing isn’t even the point here” that the financial implications of the maybe-infringement are irrelevant as long as the infringement has not been established as a fact. That expert should not have been called to begin with. The fact that they brought in this guy instead of a technical expert (that could have explained how the patents are being infringed upon) is a sign that they probably have no means of demonstrating the infringement and want to use the emotional aspect of it instead (“MOMMYYYY! WE LOST LOTS OF MONIES BECAUSE OF THAT GUYYYYY!”) in order to try and convince the jury that there is indeed a need for a monetary compensation without any actual proof.

      • Qasim

        U said he talked about the effect on monopoly apple was trying to achieve? Do u even know how that sounds like?

      • Hyr3m

        No, I said he talked about the effects samsung had on the monopoly Apple IS trying to achieve, not “was”. Do you have troubles reading/understanding?

        I dunno what it sounds like… the truth maybe ? What are you trying to say ?

      • Qasim

        He could not have talked about that, i’m talking about the sherman antitrust act and the claytons antitrust act, now why would a lawyer bring forward someone who’ll talk about something which is kind of prohibited in the US corporate environment.

      • Hyr3m

        Of course he’s not going to present it as such. Yet Apple has shown the desire to be the only rectangular-multi-touch-phone-maker on the market. They’re only fighting the really big competition but that doesn’t change what they’ve tried to accomplish since they bought iTunes.

        Yes, Apple should be prosecuted for what they’ve done over the past 13 years with iTunes and yes, it does fall into what the Sherman Antitrust act qualifies as illegal.

      • Qasim

        Seriously dude, i study thise things for exams and i can assure u that it doesnt fall into that category

      • Hyr3m

        So a prosecutor always agrees with the defense attorneys? I have studied enough law and economy to know that Apple should at the very least get some heat because of their iTunes methods.

  • Sandy Cook

    So funny to see people get upset over this

  • F25VS

    Making ads like what samsung is doing only means that they are desperate to let people buy their products. @Hyr3m think about it

    • https://twitter.com/MrElectrifyer MrElectrifyer

      Yeah, ’cause they’re not the top dog and they haven’t given up trying to be. Apple was doing the same with their 60+ “I’m a Mac and I’m a PC” commercials, until Windows 7 landed and ended their hope of gaining over 8% market share…then they focused on a different form-factor of PCs (Tablets) and owned that market.

  • Smith Hans

    White widow,Sour disel,ak47, northern lights,Blue dream,actavis
    Rainbow kush,Lemon drop,Afghan kush,Grand daddy purple,Green crack
    Text us at (716) 898-0544

  • poipiu123

    Most cost-effective website, factory direct delivery, all kinds of luxury brands, safe and efficient http://WWW.SOGARED..COM i página web. Mi sitio web es: http://www.sogared..com tienen marcas: Nike, Adidas, Puma, Gucci, LouisVuitton, Armani, Burberry, Moncler, Ralph Lauren, Lacoste, Dolce & Gabbana, Hugo Boss, Abercrombie & Fitch, CalvinKlein, Dsquared2, Yves Saint Laurent, Tommy Hilfiger sitio: http://www.SOGARED..com ◢◣◢◣◢◣◢◣◥◤◥◤◥◤◥◤
    ◢◣◢◣◢◣◢◣◥◤◥◤◥◤◥◤ We are not the usual Chinese wholesalers
    ◢◣◢◣◢◣◢◣333w
    ◥◤◥◤◥◤◥◤444
          →→WWW.SOGARED.COM