Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple Businesses

Apple Possibly Pursuing Another iMac-look Clone 189

Posted by Hemos from the more-money-for-lawyers dept.
Cybersonic writes: "Cnet has an interesting story where they are thinking about going after yet another company making a translucent PC. " It's a company from Australia that makes something called "FishPC". It's not a standalone machine like the iMac is, which the company pointed out when interviewed.Update: 04/24 03:54 by H :I've been told that the case is actually AMD's EasyNow! design - thanks to Chris Tom for the head's-up. Wonder why they aren't suing AMD?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Possibly Pursuing Another iMac-look Clone More

Apple Possibly Pursuing Another iMac-look Clone

Comments Filter:
  • The average consumer likes his computer to look like he got it at ToysRus.
  • It has great aesthetic value, which is important to the mainstream consumer. You know, those of us that don't get wood from specing out our dream computers. To the average consumer, a computer is just an appliance, like a refrigerator or a couch, and they want it to look nice or at least nifty as well as perform some function. Why do teenage girls buy clear phones? Same reason.
  • This is a freaking nature conspiracy. First it's Apple, then it's Fish.
    What's next? OOGPC?
  • So does apple feel that it can go after anyone who dares to use a bit of semi-transparent colored plastic on a piece of hardware? I can see that I suppose, I mean, using clear plastic to enclose electronic components is an obvious innovation. I bet microsoft is pissed they didn't think of it first.
  • So if I build a hexagonal computer, can I sue anyone else who does?

  • This is no eOne (Score:3)

    by carlhirsch ( 87880 ) on Monday April 24, 2000 @03:59AM (#1113679) Homepage
    Holy Wars are almost always pointless, but this one takes irrelevance to an extreme. If the primary factor in using a mac is the product design, then the OS must be irrelevant. It's not - the Mac is the MacOS, not the hardware.

    Here's what I wrote to the author of a MacCentral article on the topic last week:

    Regarding the FishPC -
    While this does show resemblance to the original iMac's Blue & White color scheme, this is no eOne. The photo in your article shows that the guts of the machine are all contained in a seperate CPU tower, a tower which looks nothing like apple's G3 Blue & White CPU. At most, the monitor's translucent plastic looks very similar to Apple's B&W 17" monitor scheme.

    While the FishPC may not be breaking much in the way of new ground in industrial design, I don't think this is as blatant a case of copyright infringement as we've seen in the past. In fact, I may even be rooting for FishPC's success in the inevitable lawsuit. After all, just because you can't afford a G4 doesn't mean you should be doomed to a lifetime of ugly computer cases.

    -carl hirsch

  • Good For Apple (Score:5)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 24, 2000 @03:59AM (#1113680)
    IP must be protected at all costs. It is this doggedness that has made Apple the success they are. Their zeal to protect their hardware and keep it closed has propelled them from the #1 computer company to number #43. Clearly, they feel more comfortable as the underdog and this move will ensure that they stay behind the pack.

    Well done, Apple !

  • You know who should be suing (Score:3)

    by FascDot Killed My Pr ( 24021 ) on Monday April 24, 2000 @04:00AM (#1113681)
    Apple doesn't have a leg to stand on. Those "jelly sandle" people from the late '80s should be suing Apple.

    Am I the only one who thinks the iMac looks like "Barbie's Dream Computer"?
    --

  • And quite rightly too (Score:4)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 24, 2000 @04:00AM (#1113682)

    Apple have every right in the world to go after other computer manufacturers that steal the "look and feel" of their machines. Apple spent a lot of money in doing market research and coming up with innovative ideas when designing the iMac, and it is quite right that they should be the sole benefits of this work and effort.

    Unless a company has the right to protect the fruits of their time, money and effort then they will not bother to come up with such innovations and new technologies. This is very much related to the whole issue of patents - a company that spends time and money on something should be allowed to benefit from that money without fear of it being stolen. After all, why bother to innovate if another company is going to steal your work a month later? This is what most /.ers seem to fail to realise in their knee-jerk anti-patent fanaticism.

    The fact is, at the end of the day our society is based around an ultra-capitalist ideal - the "American dream" of bettering yourself by gaining money and influence at the expense of others. The corporation is simply the Platonic ideal of this social structure, and as such, they deserve to be able to defend themselves from predators - and in this way, patents serve as the "anti-bodies" of the economy, and are just as necessary for a healthy organism.

  • so now wait a sec, let me just get this straight... but apple has a patent on translucent material? and they have a patent on making a computer all-in-one?? that just doesn't make sense to me, first of all i would never buy any of that all in one crap, but for those who want to, how is it that apple can have a patent on somthign like that... so they are saying that pc manufactures have to buy the rights from apple to make a case that holds a monitor and all the other guts? if so then there is a serious problem with patents and copyrights.

  • This is just as silly as Amazon copyrighting "one-click". Maybe I've been in a cave my entire life, but I seem to remember there being translucent colors before there was Apple and the iMac.

    Jobs, why stop with computers? There are plenty of other companies you can sue. Makers of pagers, cell phones, console gaming systems, etc. are all riding the "iMac" wave.

    Think different, my ass. Think VICIOUS. Maybe this would be a good time for Microsoft to sue Apple for emulating their business practices.

  • I can't believe no one ever made a translucent colored PC before Apple, does anyone know of one? (Apple to OEMs) Think Different, or we'll sue
  • I went to view them on the Fish PC website [fishpc.com.au] and I'll say this - if Apple could beat Future Power and eMachines in court, they should have no problem whatsoever stomping this one. Even though I don't see anything wrong with other companies trying to imitate the Apple "style", this is a dead ringer for an iMac, even down to the color choices. The only difference of any significance appears to be a few control buttons on the front panel. What were these guys thinking? Like it or not, this looks like an open-and-shut case for Apple, and a waste of time and money for Fish.

    - -Josh Turiel
  • Apple might be interested to know that the infamous (bondi-blue) eOne started selling here in Hong Kong. Any lawyers reading??

  • Seriously, what can they claim...

    I did not realize you were joking.

  • When did clear colored plastic become a trademark? I was at Wal-Mart the other day and say a clothes iron that had clear blue plastic for the water tank (at least that makes sense; you can see the water level). Are they going to sue the iron maker now? I have a clear plastic phone in my closet that is way older then the iMac. Is Apple going to sue them too? Is Apple so desparate to hang on to their market they are suing people over cases? Talk about some people with no clue.

  • Jumping the gun (Score:5)

    by tytso ( 63275 ) on Monday April 24, 2000 @04:04AM (#1113690) Homepage

    One of the disadvantages of living in a real-time world is that there's a pressure to "break" stories even before they have a chance to become real. If you actually read the story, you'll find that Apple is still evaluating the situation. It's true that Apple has pursued other "imitators" in the past, but are they going to pursue FishPC? It's not clear at this point.

    The fact that the article stated that attempts to contact AMD but couldn't reach anyone because of the Easter weekend is another tipoff about how quickly such articles are getting thrown together. This isn't necessarily bad, but unfortunately not all Slashdot readers seem to understand the difference between "a developing story", where the facts are still being researched, and a more thoughtful analysis news piece which fairly tells both sides of the story, such as you might find in a quality monthly news/analysis magazine. Both have their places, but people seem to instantly jump on these developing pieces without recognizing that that all of the facts might not yet be in yet, and that in this case Apple may not have even decided what to do yet.

  • Saying a computer is just an appliance is a bit like saying a cat is just a beast, like a dog or iguana. Spend enough time around computers and cats, and you'll see that there's a bit more to them than that. (Maybe that is why, according to the Jargon File, "it is widely grokked that cats have the hacker nature.")

    That said, regardless of your feelings on the iMac's design, it is in no way, shape, or form, the exclusive result of Apple's "innovation". They coupled the simple, one-piece form factor of IBM's PS/1 with the "melted-jellybean" design seen so faddishly often in cars and other devices nowadays. A great marketing move, in true Jobsian fashion, but for Apple to claim some sort of exclusive rights to it is ludicrous. Elements specific to the iMac's design might be trademarked, as is the little Apple logo or Nike swoosh, for example, but for them to sue anyone making a colorful clear-case computer is about as ridiculous as one-click patents.
  • In fact, it is not Apple, nor Microsoft...
    I remember in 1986 I bought a transparrent joystick. Seriously, it was made of transparrent plastick so you could see everything inside. I still see joysticks like that sometimes. There are also transparrent toys with electric mechanisms and even transparrent cars.

    I don't think Apple has the right to tell you not to make transparrent computer cases simply because it was not them who invented transparrent materials.

    On the other hand if someone copies the form of their computer, like the shape of the box, then they could argue that they were the first ones with this shape.
  • >Since when was apple ever number 1?

    Oh, around 1980. :)

    -carl
  • Since when was apple ever number 1?
    I imagine they were #1 early on when they made their early machines, up until the IIe or so. This is just recollection, I may be wrong.

    -Flerg
  • "You know a technology is passe, when you can get it in a range of colours."

    Some other comments...could they have made a more hideous site? I think it took 4 pages before you actually got to the front page of the site.

    I don't really think Apple has anything to worry about, with people buying them cos they think they're iMacs.

    Why?

    No-one will buy them, they're hideous!
  • Apple really doesn't have a case here, even if they do decide to go with it, looking at the system, it does have a translucent monitor case, but the style is not "iMacish". This is also not an "all in one" pc, there's the pc, monitor and other peripherals. My opinion is that having a colored translucent case isn't enough of an original idea to justify going on a rampage every time someone else uses it, it's not a new idea either, (anyone ever see those tacky transparent phones?) Apple is spending so much money on defending the "look and feel" of their products that one wonders of the quality of performance suffers because of it, even when the "look and feel" isn't all that similar. Like I said, apart from the translucent case on the monitor, the similarity of appearance ends quite distinctly there, the style and implementation of the system is too markedly different to be worth suing over.
  • I don't know what's funnier, the fact that Apple is suing for a manufacturing process (that's all there is to clear plastic, sorry..) or the fact that Roland considers clear plastic "futuristic"..
  • How can Apple sue people for making computers that simply look like theirs??? Couldn't IBM shut down the rest of the PC industry by claming Dell, Micron, and Gateway "stole" their idea for the beige case with matching keyboard and monitor? I think this is almost as bad as Amazon's 1-click patent.
  • Actually I thought they were number 1 in computers sold. Apple is the only one who can make Macintosh computers, but anyone can make PC clones. This means apple has to make a LOT of computers.
  • It sure doesn't look like an apple, I don't know, these weird gardeners?

    Seriously, it does not look like IMAC, it looks more like an old "Casper" monitor made of transparrent plastic and the components are separate.

  • Read the article. Apple didn't beat Future Power and eMachines in court. They settled out of court.

    They were bullied by a bigger company and they folded rather then take it to court.

  • This is bullocks. Sure, someone else also thought to make an excessively mod personal computer, but does Apple have a trademark on swank, or translucent plastic for that matter?

    Some important distinctions to note:

    The monitor is not gumdrop shaped

    The computer is a seperate component from the monitor

    The mouse appears to be usable

  • Check out the iGeek [geektek.com]. It looks like a close copy off the iMac, translucent case and all. Anyone see those phones with a translucent case?
  • Ok - there are quite a few translucent cases out there - where does it stop becoming "whoa - translucent cases are a good idea, let's make some" to "let's rip off apple"? Does apple know where to stop? Could they sue makers of cube-style cases [geektek.com] because NeXT (now apple) "innovated" the shape of the NeXT cube?

    ---------------------------------
  • i am forced to use iMacs at school. I have a severe problem with the design of the damn thing...the keyboard sucks, the clear wires suck...we don't need "pretty" cases, we need good stuff in the cases

    I can understand the gripes about the mouse. It's designed for small hands and -- although no one has ever really gotten a straight answer from Apple on this -- "coolness" factor. I assume there's a reason why they're sticking with it through four or five iMac revisions, plus the G3 and G4 desktops.

    I don't mind the keyboard, though. It's missing some page-naviagtion keys, but these aren't used under many MacOS applications to begin with. Plus its great if you don't have a lot of desk space. Finally, it's got a pretty good feel to it; better than the old AppleDesign II or Extended Keyboards did, and certainly nicer than the terrible two-dollar Taiwanese boards that come with many PCs. It's not a patch on the older IBM "clicking" keyboards for overall feel, but it's not terrible. A matter of personal choice more than anything else.

    What's wrong with translucent wires, though? They don't work any better (or worse) than their opaque equivalents, and they give the computer a nice, consistent look. Plus, they don't look nearly as filthy as the old grey cables did after a few months of use. Heck, the whole system ages very well: the iMac, G3, G4 and/or iBook don't look nearly as disgusting after six months of sitting in a dusty workplace. The dirt, stains and yecchh on beige/platinum grey cases really stands out.

    It seems as if most of the gripes about the iMac and its brethren are more a matter of personal taste than of professional criticism. The iMac itself is a fairly capable PC. I can see how power-users would have an aversion to it's lack of expandability and the MacOS's relative lack of robustness, but dismissing the system by it's looks is, well, thinking with your testicles (ie, I'm too manly to use a colour-coordinated PC) :)

    I actually went out and bought an iMac-colour-schemed ATX case for my Intel-based home system because I wanted something that wouldn't go yellow or dirt-stained. Pity that there's nothing I get that'll cover CD-ROM bays in the manner of Apple's G3 or G4.

  • When they released the Apple I, they had to contend with the Altair and the Timex Sinclairs during that time. Thereafter, they had won that market for a while when the twin dominars of Atari and Commodore rather trounced them in the early 80s. Everyone I know had either a C=64 or an Atari. Only schools could afford an Apple. I know people that have several C=64s in their closets, stacked like munitions. Very strange folks. Apple had a big following with the release of the Macintosh, but the pc momentum relegated them to a footnote by 1990. Then again, Atari and Commodore are no more. This could mean tha the PC may one day disappear, though that is unlikely...
  • Apple is forced to do this sort of things in order that they might actually have a case if they have to go to court over something.

    They don't another incident like the one in which Microsoft stole the GUI that they stole from Xerox!

  • ...maybe good for folks who have never seen a cathode tube, otherwise - I havent a clue... Just recently I set up a webpage for one of the teachers at our school. Hes a real Mac freak and loves his new iMac. Just to give him an idea of what the page could look like, I put in a few headlines and some text. When he read the 'Why is the iMac so ugly...???' he went ballistic. Doesnt talk to me since then. Hmmm, people are funny...
  • Actually, the monitor is the only part that looks like the iMAC to me. the PC itself is definitely seperate, and not an all-in-one. Yes, the colours are similar, but as you recall, they only have a patent on the "bondi blue" colour. As I'm against patenting a certain pigment or wavelength of light, I'd have to say Apple has no moral authority over this company, and if any company, they should sue AMD.

  • I am going to copyright/patent the standard beige PC case and sue any one past/present or furture that decides to use it, it has played a MAJOR role in the advancements in the computer industry, like the iMac case has for example.

  • Don't go there (Score:3)

    by Rupert ( 28001 ) on Monday April 24, 2000 @04:24AM (#1113711) Homepage Journal
    FishPC [fishpc.com.au], that is.

    First it checks your plugins. Note that this is slow enough (on a 28.8k modem) that it can put up a page saying what it is doing.

    Then you get a page that presumably has some huge graphic on it. I didn't wait for it to load - I clicked on "enter html page". The alternative was flash.

    Next another page, possibly also with a huge graphic. The only text on the page? A link, titled enter. I clicked it.

    Now another of these slow "I'm checking you out" pages. This one is trying to find out what browser I'm using. How long can it take them to look in the http headers? I click on "netscape / ie 4.0 + 5" because I think that might be what I have.

    Finally (the name of the file is frame_four.html) I get to the content. It is graphic intensive, and the main graphic is an animated gif, which rotates so fast you can't actually make out any details. But amidst the blurs I can make out ... a foot-tall fish-shaped system unit, with separate monitor and separate speakers.

    No wonder Apple are suing. I've half a mind to sue these bastards myself.
  • Am I the only one who thinks the iMac looks like "Barbie's Dream Computer"?

    ... or this iron [rowentausa.com].

    Check out the (old) articl e [zdnet.com] at ZDNet.
  • This whole thing over translucent cases is rediculous. We have people in our advertising department who don't care if their machine is a Mac or PC, just as long as it is 'blueberry' and not 'strawberry.'

    You can get ATX translucent cases here [compuplus.com].

    -Kris
  • I have a Vectrex sitting at home, which is a black system, vertically shaped with a built-in vector monitor. The game controller is wide, and it all looks suspciously like a macintosh(but infinitely cooler). Of course, this came out in 1982.

    I think GCE(Milton Bradley) should sue Apple for copying their Vectrex look.

  • Cheap rip offs (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This isn't about make an all-in-one design. Why can't these companies come up with their own unique looks? They all have to copy the look and color scheme used by the iMac, but there are countless other possible designs
  • Yes, companies have a right to defent their IP, yes we need to encourage innovation & research, etc.


    But, there is a limit to this. Remember when Apple and Microsoft effectively both tried to copyright the GUI? (which they had both ripped off from Xerox anyway) what it they had succeeded? What if the judge had come down firmly for one side or the other?


    If one company has the exclusive right to produce PCs that look good and are designed for the home, it would be as damaging to the computer industry as if only one company had the right to make GUIs.


    Yes, the eOne was clearly trying to pass itself off as an iMac, both in name and looks, which could confuse consumers and steal customers from Apple; but this is like Sony trying to prevent other hi-fi manufacturers from selling hi-fis with black boxes.

  • CPU (Score:1)

    by Kronos. ( 40016 )
    Am I the only one that is bugged by the way people misuse the acronym 'CPU' to mean 'The big box that you plug wires into' instead of the correct meaning ???
  • I don't practice in this area but...

    Just to point out the legal significance of your post, generally one of the most important issues in a case like this is whether consumers would be confused. After looking at the Fish it appears that Apple has much weaker argument for consumer confusion here as compared to the case of the eOne. Of course Apple could raise other issues.
  • I don't know that I'd say Apple stole the GUI idea from Xerox. They paid a million dollars to Xerox to exchange ideas with their people (or something like that). I'm sure the big wigs at Xerox had any idea what they were sitting on. Oh well.

    Everybody steals ideas from everybody else. I don't see what there is to get excited about. Apple is considering a law suit. They haven't actually sued them yet.
    --
  • actually, if i remember right, the apple II was by far the most popular home computer in the early 80's beyond the "toys" of commodore, atari, and others. [not a troll - i had and loved my atari XL, but it was not a business machine at all].

    the apple II had visicalc (the first spreadsheet) , was everywhere in schools and starting to show up in corporations by 1980. that's why IBM hurredly released the PC in early 1981. apple was so bold at this point that they took out a full page ad in the NYTimes sarcastically welcoming IBM to the market.

    they never released the apple 1 in any useable form. the II came out in 1976 (i think) and is generally considered the first useable personal computer.

    finally, the mac was introduced in january 1984 with tons of hype but never really got a full head of steam because of lack of software and lack of hardware power (up until the mac II in 1988). i think the peak of the mac's market share was around 1990 (maybe the quadra years?) with about 25% of the desktop market. it also hit about 20% when they released the first power pc macs in 1994. it dropped down to about 5% around 97, and is now hovering around 10-15% with iMacs, G4's, iBooks, and powerbooks. (all market share figures depend on who you ask, naturally).


    ------------
    DJ Raz
    raz@wfnk.com [mailto]
  • I wonder why no-one has patented beige rectangular boxes...I mean thats IP isn't it? According to Apple it seems to be. Do they not have anything else except the appearance of their box to rely on for sales? Does gateway sell their systems only because of the neat-o cow box (I'd never buy one but still). Honestly to hear their engineering people talk (and a lot of other people inculding me sometimes) you'd think their processors and hardware in general is actually better. I have just been informed that people who are looking for pretty colors are the target of Apples new products. They should start selling paintings if this IP is so important. If they want to keep their stuff closed off from everyone else thats their business but this is ridiculous. just my $0.015 (not quite 2 cents)


    Apartment6 [apartment6.org]
  • The ONLY similarity here is the COLOR. My GOD, Apple thinks they have a COPYRIGHT on TRANSLUCENT COLORS?

    Paint it beige and it's just another monitor. Ugh. What a world.

  • It's not a patch on the older IBM "clicking" keyboards for overall feel, but it's not terrible. A matter of personal choice more than anything else


    I was thinking about getting a mac. I know it's not a problem to get a decent USB mouse these days - but does anyone know if there are any decent USB click keyboards available?


    When I'm coding I need that reassuring little clicky sound to tell me that i've pressed a key as much as i need caffine :-)

  • NewsFlash: Apple files copyright infringement suit (Score:3)

    by Guppy ( 12314 ) on Monday April 24, 2000 @04:43AM (#1113724)
    ...In other news today, Apple announced the company had filed suit against the Pacific jellyfish Aequoria victoria. Legal representatives for the company cited the gelatinous organism's rounded shape, translucent body, colorful bioluminescence, and utter brainlessness.

    According to the Apple spokesman, "We believe our lawsuit is justified, as the resemblence to the iMac is obvious". No comment was available from the jellyfish, which was last seen munching on zooplankton.

  • If the primary factor in using a mac is the product design, then the OS must be irrelevant. It's not - the Mac is the MacOS, not the hardware.

    Take a second look:

    http://www.linuxppc.com/about/hardwar e/apple/ [linuxppc.com]

  • 'scuse me. there were many all-in-one computers before the ibm ps/1. the original mac predates it. so does the commodore pet. just a correction. your history is off, but the point is well taken. i can see going after e-machines and future power, but not the fish pc.

    tom dutton
  • Until a few years ago, actually. Until they really started screwing up (as in, bad even by Apple's standards), they were consistently in the top 5 when each quarter's sales results were announced. They were usually in the top 3, and sometimes #1.

    Apple's unmatched ability to shoot itself in the foot, combined with consolidation in the industry, removed them from this tier. However, they're within shooting distance, but even reaching #1 will make them small enough that they're still a niche . . .
  • Not only that, but their pages won't let you use your Back button (at least on IE 5 for me). Keeps loading the same page right away. God, do I hate that. "Silly customer, our page is the best! You don't really want to leave!"

  • "Apple have every right in the world to go after other computer manufacturers that steal the "look and feel" of their machines."

    1) Apple doesn't have every right, but has some rights under US law.

    2) ""look and feel"" could be applied to anything my Dell PC and home build PC "look and feel" like the old IBM PC I had, does IBM have every right to sue Dell for stealing the "look and feel" of the oringal "look and feel" IBM "innovatived" with the beige case and standard looking beige monitor?

    Do you think this HURTS the computer industry as a whole? Copyrights/patents and suing people over them is just a whole big mess that doesn't have any productive outcome for the rest of the world/industry but only benifits some greedy CEO. Plus it really isn't all that "innovatived", I seen phones ten years ago that had this "innovative" design. Maybe Techilishen Phone, Inc. should sue the hell out of Apple for STEALING this "look and feel" from their phones.
  • If Mercedes Benz tried to sue BMW just because they used a similar looking metallic royal blue, they'd be laughed out of any court in Germany. This sort of thing really shows up the US legal system as what it is, welfare support for lawyers at the cost of the community
  • I suggest making the little Reserved Symbol (R) ni the Apple icon at least as big as the Apple icon itself. Maybe reverse the sizes of the reserved symbol and the Apple symbol?
  • Whoever made those translucent phones in 80s should sue Apple for copying their "electronics in colored clear plastic" idea. Here are the next inovations: 1. translucent body panels, hood, trunk on cars. 2. translucent refrigerator doors. 3. translucent shoes(done already?)
  • 1: Who said that apple is suing FishPC !? . it's just those so caled internet journalist think so. 2: Apple also got apple monitor that look very similiar to that one shown, they no necesary sue because of all in one design. 3: Apple is a hardware company 4: Macintosh is MacOS + apple hardware.
  • No, they'd be sued by me; I've patented the color blue, at all possible wavelengths.

    Does this anger you? Then you better send me some more money, because I've patented that emotion.
  • I am seeking compatability with things like plain text display. Got any ideas?

    Yes upgrade your computer to something that was built in the 90's and get some software along with it so you can read formatted text.

    Asshole.


  • Hrmm.. now SGI needs to sue apple for making brightly colored computer cases.

  • We REALLY cant let Apple keep doing this!

    I understand that Apple computers created a 'unique look' with their I-Mac... BUT there is nothing they can do about companies making similar case designs... It seems that Apple goes after ANY company with a traslucent case, as soon as they get popular enough to gain attention.

    Beeper companies have has translucent cases on beepers for years now... (its just a bunch of electronics in a case, about as easy to use as a mac O:)

    Heck, the machine in question here, isnt even integrated!! I did not have any problem with apple until now, but this really upsets me...

    Oh and as a side note, Slashdot actually put up one of MY submissions, w00h00!! Makes me quite happy :)
  • It is exactly for reasons like this that I don't buy products from Apple. Love their hardware. Looking forward to OSX. Their emphasis on consumer multi-media is right on target.

    But I won't do business with a company that makes fruit colored plastic a higher priority than customer relations.

    Maybe I'm a lone maverick, but I doubt it.

    If Steve & Co. are happy to make what money they can by overcharging their faithful loyalists, good for them.

    They could make more if they would simply stop being so prickish.

    (Has anyone patented fruit colored plastic yet?)
  • Despite being somewhat of an Apple Fan (with the exclusion of the new keyboards and hocky pucks), I have to agree that they need to get off of this sue-happy-while-we-patent-translucency kick.

    Besides...Why would I buy a translucent, fish-looking PC? Are they going to try and market this to the anglers/outdoorsmen?

    *Yeah...you shoulda seen the one I caught the other day...must have been at least 750 Mhz!* A whole new dimension to 'Fish Stories'.

  • But I don't see the any of those companies that have been selling translusent cassettes since the 70s sueing Apple. Plus I dont see IBM sueing all those companies that make black cases. This all about lawyers justifying their own parisitic existence.
  • Actually that's fallen into disuse in the past few years; it used to be much more accepted to use "CPU" that way. And to tell the truth, I don't see the big deal; it's a central processing "unit", which has a pretty open meaning. I mean, if they called it the central processor I could see your point...
  • ummm. wrong. apple paid stock, and set up an appointment to look at (for specific r/d purposes) xerox's machine. microsoft did rip the gui, tho, but from a dev mac jobs gave them to dev sw. tom
  • They clearly should be going after HandSpring. It has a blue translucent plastic case too.
  • I have spraypainted my previously beige computer case with #40 Krylon(tm) Green. Anyone who dares copy this will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of stupidity allowed under the law. You have been warned.
    ----------------------------------------- -
    the amazing bc
    latin/funk flugelhorn & trumpet
    webnaut, music junkie, sysadmin from hell
  • If I remember correctly Apple was only able to defend IP in the US against Daewoo. The chance of them defending IP on grounds of look and feel in Taiwan was pretty slim. However, since e-machines was selling (fairly well at that) in the US they could persue them in US court.

    I suspect that Apple pervailing on this case will depend on IP law is AU. And as long as they are not selling the cases in the US then Apple will have a disadvantage in the case.
  • they should sue AMD

    Why?
    Molog

    So Linus, what are we doing tonight?

  • Off topic; but I own a cat. (Score:4)

    by Dman33 ( 110217 ) on Monday April 24, 2000 @05:11AM (#1113761)
    And I am a hacker. I actually own two cats... One is more of a hacker, the other is a cracker. One spends the entire day building cool stuff with boxes, the other is trying to exploit the security on the cupboard that contains the catnip! I guess I should rename the cracker cat to 5cr1p7 k177y or something... I like it...
  • 1. The Fish PC is designed to fool people into believing it is an iMac: I think not. No one is going to go out, buy a Fish PC, bring it home and say, "What the $%#@ is this %^&*ing Windows doing on here? I wanted a Mac, it should run Mac OS!" No, although a convergience of the Mac OS look and feel for the KDE environment, plus the Fish PC appearance might theoretically convince people of this, it would only happen if it was marketed dishonestly. This is for IBM-clone PC owners with "candy PC" envy, "I want my PC to look like candy too!" Unfortunately, since the very theoretical possibility that someone could try to market these (to very uninformed consumers) as iMacs is the the reason they will state to a judge as to why this PC shouldn't be sold.

    2. The actual reason they are suing: They don't want anyone else making a PC that looks as cool as theirs.

    I'm not sure about this one. If I come out with a cool new desk, that looks cool but isn't otherwise particularly special, can I stop people from making knockoffs? Can Nintendo sue the Digimon people (or Digimon sue Pokemon, I need to check the chronology) because it's horning in on their "collect cute monsters" style of gaming? Can Wizards of the Coast sue Lord British for ripping off the D&D theme? Would we want them to be able to?

    I think it all depends on the law. If the law says, "you can Copyright/Patent the look of a PC" then if Apple filled out all the correct paperwork, I'm guessing Apple wins. If they are trying to sue them based on the, "They're fooling people into thinking it is a genuine iMac," then they are being disingenuous, I think, and may win but should lose.

  • Apple has NOT attacked this company yet. And I don't think they will. Why? Because this is quite clearly not an iMac ripoff.

    People here seem to have the misconception that Apple's just suing people who make their cases out of translucent plastic. This isn't right, and it wouldn't be right of Apple to do it. No, Apple goes after companies that blatantly rip off the iMac's design. And it does have a right to do this. Look at FuturePower's own ripoff, the ePower. Frankly, I'm surprised they didn't just leave the Apple logo on the cases; it is the only difference. It is clearly meant to confuse the consumer.

    Translucent plastic certainly isn't new. But it's not the issue, either. The iMac has a design that is clearly non-generic, and computer companies have done little but rip it off. I applaud AMD for making a "cool" case that doesn't rip off the iMac; this would be why Apple won't sue them. It's an original design, and even though most of the color schemes are quite awful (at least the iMac doesn't clash with itself, even though it might clash with everything else) it's a good and original idea.
  • No phone is plugged into the through jack. The modem is an external USR Courier X2, flashed to v90. The problems are twofold. One is the phone at the other end, in the lab at work, is behind a switch that does not believe in any speed above 28.8k. The other is the crappy phone wiring in this house, that sometimes gives me 40k to my ISP, but usually hovers in the mid 30s.

    Oh, plus all this is going through IP masquerading on a 486 box running RedHat 6.2b. No real problems, apart from Outlook, which needs to be shutdown and restarted before it will give me my mail. Do you think it knows I'm secretly using Linux?
  • Give me a break. Apple has spent many millions of dollars establishing the iMac look as a distinctive product identification. Predicatably we have dozens of companies looking to rip this off. What the hell is preventing these other companies from developing their own distinctive case design? Nothing, except they lack the talent to do so. Apple worked hard to establish this in the market, and deserves the rights to it. Do slashdotters go after Coca-Cola for defending their coke bottle shape from copiers? I don't think so.

    Some users have pointed out that this design is not the same as the iMac in that it is not all in one. Well, get a clue - Apple sells other computers with the iMac look that are also not all in one. Ever see the Blue and White G3 with matching monitor?

    And then there was the comment about the AMD Easy Now design. Give me a break! This design looks NOTHING like any of Apple's computers. Solid purple color with green trim? REAL close to an iMac, NOT!!!!

  • You make the common assumption (with debatable validity) that innovation will not occur without the ability to "benefit from that money without fear of it being stolen". On the other hand, I believe that innovation can and does occur (sometimes at great expense, and sometimes not) without fear nor worry that the fruits of that labour will not furnish the creator with vast amounts of monetary return.

    Perhaps CmdrTaco should shut down all other similar Weblogs due to their infringement on his novel combination of News distribution, comment tracking, Moderation, and the hundred other ideas that have snuck in to Slashdot. That would not be very prudent, though, since the sharing of the concept brings about a wider range of ideas in the individual implementation that will thus spur more ideas and more, some good, some bad, but with more change than would be possible should there only ever be one allowed. Somehow he (and others who work on Slashdot) still make enough money to survive and maintain a good degree of influence. Without fighting.

    I think that you are right in asserting that your society is thus based around the ultra-capitalist ideal of bettering yourself by gaining money and influence at the expense of others. Remember, though, that a society is what its members make it. As you appear to feel that it is right for Apple (or any other company which values its "IP" more than it values the betterment of themselves and others) to restrict the freedom of others to take a good idea and share it with others, it seems that you fit well within your described society.

    Your society, however, is not mine and as such (from my third-party viewpoint) I find that your "anti-bodies" in the form of patents are not necessary for a healthy organism, but are instead a hinderence to it. That really hinges on the differences between our views of healthy, I suppose. If by healthy you mean "companies with lots of power, money, and influence get to keep others from directly benefitting from their ideas in ways that do not make them even more rich and powerful", then yes, I suppose you are living in a "healthy" society. To me, though, healthy is a society where people contribute and share their ideas and work in a fashion agreeable to the most possible involved.

    A good example is the Free Software movement. Very few people are unhappy in the Free Software realm. Many people are unhappy in the Proprietary software (and now, apparantly, the proprietary computer case design) realm. I just want for myself and those around me to be as happy as possible.

  • My favorite quote from the article:

    What also makes the system very different is the CPU--it stands under 30 cm high and has a front-loading CD-ROM system.

    DAMN! I didn't know Intel made CPU's that big--I always thought they were getting smaller! And a built-in CD-ROM? Holy crap, that must require a huge heatsink! ;-)

    Oh, wait a minute, perhaps this is just a case of CNET interviewing a moron...
  • Am I the only one who detected a faint sense of sarcasm in this post? I think I would have modded it "funny" rather than "insightful", even if he is correct about how our sad country works...
  • Grow up Apple. First it's other people's computers look too much like yours. Then it's other people's skins look too much like yours. Stop pretending colored cases and skinned ui is some fscking brilliant thing. Begone UI troll. The whole computer industry was based on copying and sharing of ideas. Innovation is what keeps you a step /ahead/ of people. It is not a guarantee that nobody else will follow you.

    And by the way, why the heck is the CDROM on this fish thing sideways, eating up the surface space of the case? Do too many people really think the CDROM is a mug holder or something?
  • Do we need a little "confidence" rating or something in the title bar of some of these stories for the link-following and research impaired, like me, who don't want to spend all day verifying slashdot stories? A bar or percentage maybe...going to 100% when actually confirmed for a fact. Something like this might have dispelled some of the hype over the "phantom" Frontpage security hole, e.g.
  • I'm a LinuxPPC user, but I don't pretend to think that people buy Macs to run Linux on them.

    99.99% of the people who buy Macs do so because of the MacOS. That's the 'carrot' that Apple uses to prompt people to buy Macs (they are a hardware company, but use the OS to differentiate their product).

    In this case, I don't think Apple should bother - this isn't nearly as blatant a copycat design as the others (which were complete ripoffs in my opinion, and deserving what whatever they got).


    - Jeff A. Campbell
    - VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com [velocinews.com])
  • Why is having a translucent PC case good?

    Consumer asthetics only.

    The Handspring Visor now comes in translucent plastics, in five colors. My wife, who once considered my Palm Pilot a useless little geek gadget, saw the review for the Visor, and absolutely had to have one, in translucent orange, of course.

    Yes, I know the Visor is basically a Pilot in translucent plastics. But she bought one anyways, solely because it comes in translucent orange. She also wants an iBook, again in translucent orange. And she is disappointed that we bought the original iMac--not because the newer ones are more powerful and feature DVD and the iMovie software package, but because the new ones also come in (you guessed it) translucent orange.

    Colored plastics appeal to folks like my wife. And people like my wife potentially have hundreds of millions (collectively) that they are more likely to spend on a translucent orange (or blue, or green, or whatever) computer than they are on one which only comes in drab beage, or worse: looks like it was designed by the same people who designed the Death Star or Darth Vader's helmet.
  • It looks like the cases that are being pimped by AMD aren't just iMac-ish colors on a stock IBM PC case. If that was illegal, then ColorCase [colorcase.com] would have been shut down ages ago.

    Apple, no matter how much they would like it, doesn't have a copyright on "clear colored plastic".

    And besides, the only thing that looks like an iMac on that C|Net page was the monitor, not the other components. The only issue here would be the shape of the monitor, and that can be done away with without destroying the overall effect of the case. I would be amazed if Apple won this one.
  • And that's the thing about this article: it's apparent that the FishPC is not an "all-in-one" design; the PC itself resides in the fish-shaped case next to the monitor in the pictures off their web site. (Hense, the name.)

    The only thing it has in common with the iMac is the translucent plastics. I suspect that even Apple wouldn't waste the lawyer's time on going after something which clearly cannot be confused with an iMac.

    My take, by the way, is that it's reasonable to go after imitators if their products seem similar enough to the iMac that average consumers are confused. Frankly, one of the clones Apple went after (forgot which one) was about to release an all-in-one computer which looked so much like the iMac that the only way you could tell was by booting the thing. (And the silk screened label under the screen, of course.)

    But it would take a complete moron to confuse a fish-shaped box up on it's tail with an all-in-one design.
  • That's right, I said good for Apple!

    Apple had a potentially great design idea. (although the execution of the iMac sucked in a lot of ways) Other companies should be free to borrow some ideas and innovate with that information, but they shouldn't be allowed to rip off ideas directly.

    In other words, if you look at a machine and think, "Hey--looks like Apple has a new machine out!" then they've violated Apple's trademark/patent rights. If you look at a machine and think, "Hey--looks like they stole Apple's design!" then they've violated Apple. If you look at a machine and think, "Hey--looks like they didn't have many original ideas" then things start to get grey. Of course, if you look at a machine and think, "Now THAT'S a unique design!" then they're obviously in the clear. Unless Apple disagrees, in which case you go to court.

    Honestly, Apple came up with one of the only original not-a-beige-box ideas available, and nobody's had enough creativity to figure out that different design doesn't HAVE to mean rounded corners, transluscent colours, and friendly logos just like Apple's.

    Here's the short test: Is this company's design riding on the coattails of Apple? In my mind, the answer is YES!

  • Since when was apple ever number 1?
    He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.

    Apple was #1 in the late 1970s, before IBM introduced the PC. Ever see an Apple II?

  • Personally, I buy my computers in black rackmount cases with lots of fans.
  • Be used to use it all the time.

    Hence the 'BeBox'.

    I've heard it elsewhere as well.

    - Jeff A. Campbell
    - VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com [velocinews.com])
  • First of all, Hemos, will you _please_ get over your hatred of Apple and stop posting sarcastic anti-Apple comments on the front page of /.?

    When are you ever going to follow up on that "More coming soon..." comment you made on the front page a while back? Did you decide not to follow up when it turned out you were wrong about Apple in that case?

    Now, of course Apple is considering action against FishPC. The designs are similar enough to cause confusion - however, Apple has not YET sued them (see, Hemos, the reason they aren't suing AMD is because they AREN'T SUING FishPC yet, if they ever will!)

    However, Apple has not filed suit and in this case, I don't think they will. They don't have a great chance of winning, because it isn't standalone, even though the monitor does remind me of an iMac. Moreover, the pricing structure on the thing places its cost way above what you can get an iMac (I think.. dunno AU->US conversion rates).

    Any major company's legal department is going to be eagle-eyed in watching for infringement.. what about LucasFilms and THX and Dr. Dre? Everyone still likes Star Wars.

    Apple has come a very long way in the past couple years. They have an entire Open Source operating system available, are basing their next generation Mac OS on that Open Source operating system (and for those of you who complain it's not GPL, there's a reason. You can't mix GPL and proprietary software).. a UNIX, for god's sake.

    They use industry standard parts.. IDE, PCI, AGP, SDRAM, etc - have led the way with USB (naysayers say what you will, but USB exploded with the advent of the iMac) and continue to implement Firewire, a digital video standard they invented, across the board.

    They use IEEE 802.11, an open standard, to communicate wirelessly, when they could have developed some proprietary scheme.

    Did you know that one of the first questions when Apple meets with a third-party hardware/software supplier is? "Can we release this?"... as in "Can we make this part of Darwin and release the source code to it?"

    That's a big change for Apple.

    You may not like the company because you grew up using PCs... I have never understood the vehement dislike those who grew up on PCs seem to have for the Mac. They constantly go on about the Mac being inferior and a toy and that there's more games or software, and that (once these people go from being MS zealots to Linux zealots) Apple is proprietary and they just want to steal our good ideas and so on and so forth...

    Everywhere you turn, there are IT managers who have a dislike of Macs for no other reason than they don't understand them. That's what it boils down to. You hate what you don't understand.

    Well, understand this: Apple is developing machines with industry standard parts implementing industry standard protocols designed to run an OS that is based on the tried and true BSD Unix heritage and is at the same time based on a core that is Open Source, and said core is even designed to run on Intel-compatibles.

    The end of cloning was a blessing: the inferior quality machines Power Computing, Motorola and UMAX produced (I know they are, I've used and maintained them) were being sold into Apple's own base and killing off the company. No Apple, no MacOS, no clones. In the end the result would be the same.

    Can't you see the writing on the wall? Apple is preparing for a new era -- PPC and Intel machines, an OS constantly improved via Open Source development -- it doesn't matter if the Linux zealots join in.. there are other developers out there -- and is leading a charge that is masterfully executed.

    The iMac is Apple's cash cow. You people seem more concerned about plastics than freedom of code, something Apple has shown a renewed commitment to on its Darwin listservs. You should join in sometime and find out how this company is changing itself for the better.

    Stop blinding yourselves with learned rage. Look honestly at what Apple has done over the past two years and tell me that they have done nothing good. If you can tell me that, you have no clue where the future of the desktop is going.
  • ...which looks nothing like the iMac other than being colorful. It's not all-in-one, even the monitor looks to be one of those rather expensive LCD ones rather than a CRT. The one in the pic on that page doesn't even use translucency (that I can tell - I could be wrong).

    I could see if it was all-in-one, translucent, and roughly gumdrop-shaped (like the iMac), or a tower with those gawd-awful "handles" all over it, translucent, with a drop-down motherboard tray.(like the g3/g4 series) I don't see where Apple can sue over a simply "colorful" computer design. - else we're all stuck with beige for eternity.
  • From a design standpoint I can't see how any transluscent computer MUST be an iMac ripoff. Those eMachines were one-piece knockoffs that look a lot like the iMac, but the FishPC and the AMD are strikingly original (well the AMD is, if that is the original) and the CD player is really cool, but they have colored clear plastic so Apple is getting its collective underwear into a bunch. I doubt AMD is going to give two shits about the FishPC, they actually make great hardware at good prices that sell regardless what they look like.

    When technology companies talk about protecting their patents who thinks colored plastic panels? Is this all Apple has going for it? Sure sounds like it. These beige boxes are in desperate need of a new design and the industry doesn't need Apple crying foul everytime theres clear plastic involved. Hey Apple, make computers not cases and you might go far.
  • Well put, computers look the way they do because of office lighting regulations. Do people like slashdot-terminal live in an modernist like office building with florescent lighting, handicap accesible bathrooms, and cubicles instead of walls? Doubt it, people by nature gravitate towards aestheticly pleasing shapes and colors. Computers are cheap and disposable consumer goods they might as well look good and when they do people react. Especially when this thing is going to be sitting wide open in their home. Its sad that the current crop of good looking electronic cases aren't much appreciated by typical males or so called power-users because our society's macho and intellectual ideals put a taboo on art and expression leaving the market open for women (my girlfriend has this green cellphone) and artists (this graphic desiner loves the new cases) etc.

    Maybe slashdot-terminal drives a black model-t around and wears the same suit everyday, but most people demand more than plain looking appliances and from the looks of things, they're coming. Better stockpile those beige cases, cause once people start getting a decent choice in cases and peripherals there ain't gonna be anymore made.

  • Agreed. And they probably think they're really cool. (FishPC uses the term "groovy".)

    All that JavaScript, Flash, frames, text in images, and browser checking doesn't do anything for them. The appearance of their site could be achieved with vanilla HTML, animated GIFs, and tables. Their text in image form is in a vanilla sans-serif font (Verdana, probably), so there was no reason to use an image anyway.

  • Yes, I know that the slashdot gang gets many article submitions but they could at least read the the one they're gonna post.

    I've been told that the case is actually AMD's
    EasyNow! design - thanks to Chris Tom for the head's-up. Wonder why they aren't suing AMD?


    This almost sounds like inside info, yet anyone who read the article saw this and its hyperlink. [amd.com] Maybe you should hire Chris Tom to do your proof reading. I wouldn't care but this shit happens all too often usually with misleading titles and summaries. Read one for the Gipper.

    (MM note: I don't care if you mark this down, I've got karma to spare.)
  • I sincerely hope this is a troll. The dated idea that "women like pretty colourful things" just because of their sex is an idea that I find to be offensive in the extreme.

    It was not.

    It was, however, a recognition that perhaps men (and the geeks here on /.) don't have any asthetic taste to speak of. (I mean, come on: do we all really want computers that look like they were ripped off the bridge of the Death Star?)

    Oh, and by the way: I upgraded my Palm (an old 512K model) to a Visor. In green... :-)
  • Both - Apple has targetted their PR on mass media stuff (mostly movies and TV), with fairly good results. I believe they have given iMacs and other machines to studios for free in exchange for a few seconds of exposure. In some cases, an Apple product has played a very prominent role in various films (Jurassic Park, Mission Impossible, etc).

    I'm still trying to figure out how Apple got Open Transport - their networking architecture - to interface with the alien mothership in Independence Day. At the time, OT truly sucked, and it was hard enough to get it to work on terrestrial networks. All this, and they chose to spotlight the Powerbook 5300, possibly the worst laptop Apple has ever made.

    Anyhow, there is also a pretty strong contingent of Mac people in the graphic arts field, as well as Hollywood in general. Script writers, directors, actors, etc. I'm not sure what the percentage is, but it's probably a lot higher than the rest of the world at large. I imagine that they have so many Macs laying around, they make good props.



    - Jeff A. Campbell
    - VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com [velocinews.com])
  • (Maybe that is why, according to the Jargon File, "it is widely grokked that cats have the hacker nature.")
    You bring this up but do a great deal of "hackers" own cats?

    Silly human. Anyone who truly groks cats knows that the cat owns the hacker, and not the reverse. They allow us to share their homes because we can operate the canopener and clean out the litterbox. Cats were worshipped as gods in ancient Egypt; they have never forgotten this fact.


    "The axiom 'An honest man has nothing to fear from the police'

Slashdot Top Deals

There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.

Close