UK Judge: Galaxy Tab "Not Cool" Enough To Infringe iPad 325
zacharye writes "U.K. Judge Colin Birss has ruled that Samsung can continue selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the region because the Android tablet is 'not as cool' as the iPad and therefore is unlikely to be confused with Apple's slate. Samsung's Galaxy line of tablets 'do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design,' Judge Birss said. 'They are not as cool.'"
Catch-22 (Score:5, Interesting)
So, when Apple inevitably appeals the decision, can we take that as a de facto statement that they do not, in fact, find their own products to be "cool" or posses "understated and extreme simplicity" in their designs?
Re:Horrible Logic (Score:4, Interesting)
The rule is fine, but the logic used is horrible. Instead of pointing out how obviously screwed up the patent system is, we see this: A special case exception based on an opinion, which is most obviously not law and can not be translated in to law!
I kind of see it the other way around; the logic of "Samsung's device is sufficiently different from Apple's device as to not risk customer confusion" is sound, but the way the judge went about positing it ('Aw man, this Samsung thing isn't as hip and cool and trendy as the iPad my GGD got me for Kwanzaa") is a bit 3rd grade.
Apple is good for graphics (Score:5, Interesting)
There are those who still insist Apples are inherently better for graphics, which really isn't true anymore.
I loved the concept of Android, but used an iPhone for the past 3 years. Android has really come a long way in that time. It should be noted that most iOS 5 features existed in Android first. The notion that Android isn't as cool, slick or intuitive as iOS was once true, but no longer is.
I made the switch to a Galaxy S III and it actually exceeded my expectations. The OS is very intuitive, slick and looks really good. The surprising thing is I think the typography is better, which is an area where Apple normally excels. Roboto is just a great looking scalable font.
I find great features every day that I didn't even know about. For example, I set an alarm on my phone to take a nap. It slowly woke me up with soft music like a zen alarm clock.
Re:Apple is good for graphics (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Horrible Logic (Score:5, Interesting)
I kind of see it the other way around; the logic of "Samsung's device is sufficiently different from Apple's device as to not risk customer confusion" is sound, but the way the judge went about positing it ('Aw man, this Samsung thing isn't as hip and cool and trendy as the iPad my GGD got me for Kwanzaa") is a bit 3rd grade.
I don't quite understand this... Whilst I agree that pretty much no iDevice is going to be confused with an Android device...
The Galaxy tablets “do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design,”
Both devices are basically a screen with almost no external buttons, plain black frame around the screen, rectangular... I'm not sure how you can get more simple. The only way I can see the iPad being simpler and more understated than the Tab is because it only has 1 button on the front instead of 4, but whilst this is visually simpler, being usably simpler is debatable (I for one find Android devices easier to use than iDevices precisely because there are these buttons that always do the same thing and are always in the same place - note, this isn't a "foo is better than bar" comment, it is simply pointing out that "less buttons == simpler" is very very debatable.
Once you get to the software itself, on the surface iOS and Android are pretty similar - a matrix of application launcher icons, so I'm not sure you can draw any "foor is simpler than bar" conclusions here either.
The judge found that Samsung’s products were distinctive because they were thinner and had “unusual details” on the back.
Apple seem to think that thinner == cooler, with products such as the MacBook Air, so I'm not sure this comment is going to sit well with them.
On the other hand, I have no idea where the "unusual details" thing came from - the back of both devices looks quite similar, except for the fact that one of them has an apple logo and the other has a samsung logo (i.e. other than the logos, they are pretty plain except for the regulatory info that they both have) Compare: http://blog.actioncreations.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/galaxyTabBack.jpg [actioncreations.com] http://mobodojo.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/ipad_back.jpg [mobodojo.com]
So on the whole, these devices are different enough to tell apart (as much as any reasonably plain appliance can be told apart - for example, most TVs look pretty similar to each other but this doesn't seem to end with the TV manufacturers suing each other), but the way the judge has gone about deciding this seems... odd.
Re:Is the judge a member of Anon? (Score:4, Interesting)
Most consumers won't care that a judge has said their product is cool. It's not exactly going to make the front page of the tabloids- outside of the Slashdot crowd, most people don't follow technology patent lawsuits ever so closely. They will notice that Samsungs are still stocked in all good gadget shops.
However, if Apple were to seriously develop a long and protracted court case on the premise of persuading a judge and jury that the Galaxy is cool in the following scientifically provable ways...well, that's surreal and amusing enough that quite a few news outlets will report it in their "you couldn't make this up" pages. That would be some serious good press for Samsung.
It's difficult to see how the negatives for Samsung outweigh the positives.
Re:Is the judge a member of Anon? (Score:5, Interesting)
The ones without a filter are called former sales engineers.
If you ever see a SE with an amazing resume but 3 or 4 recent 1-2 year stints on there? Those tend to be the ones whose filter broke mid career. I love those. They are a fantastic resource for competition research... it's like a waterfall of delicious negativity.