Apple Blocks Sale of Galaxy Tab 10.1 In Australia 316
lukehopewell1 writes "Apple has obtained an injunction from an Australian court effectively blocking the sale of the new Android Honeycomb-powered Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1v. Apple Australia claims that the unit infringes on 10 of the Cupertino, California-based company's patents including the slide to unlock functionality as well as the edge-bounce feature. Samsung will provide Apple Australia with three units for study in coming weeks to ascertain whether or not the Korean gadget maker did in fact infringe on Apple's patented intellectual property."
Add "on a mobile computing device" to anything! (Score:4, Insightful)
I am fully confident that this thread will demonstrate the utmost civility of Slashdot users.
Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened. (Score:5, Insightful)
The either/or logical fallacy (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think Samsung only has pull in Korea. They both have a lot of money to throw around.
Re: (Score:2)
It might work in China, but for the rest, I believe they have a judiciary system that is a bit autonomous so I guess it's going to be complex.
That said, it's obviously easier for Apple since they were first to market. Samsung can hardly say "they copied us with their new iPad" since Samsung themselves (with Google obviously) cloned the iPhone and the iPad for so long.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just saying having influence in China might be enough to ban a product entirely from the country, although the iPad has a bit of exposure. Now, I don't think Samsung has any - or at least not that much.
Re: (Score:3)
Cash and bribe is how justice and other forms of business work in China.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cheap Android tablets: so versatile [bbyopen.com]. (Note: don't click if you can't take a joke.)
Re: (Score:2)
+1 Funny obligatory.
Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, that's Apple being scared. It's definitely not your wishful thinking projecting emotions onto a business decision.
They're trying to block the entry of a competitor via the legal system as opposed to competing with them once the product is released.
That is not a business decision, that's an admission they cannot compete.
Re: (Score:2)
That is not a business decision, that's an admission they cannot compete.
Because Sumsung's Android gear has been selling so well they've decided to no longer report the numbers [techcrunch.com], to ...um... not make anyone jealous. You can see why Apple might be shaking in their boots.
Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (Score:4, Insightful)
That is not a business decision, that's an admission they cannot compete.
Because Sumsung's Android gear has been selling so well they've decided to no longer report the numbers [techcrunch.com], to ...um... not make anyone jealous. You can see why Apple might be shaking in their boots.
Could you have found a more biased site. They readily admit they are paid by Apple. Besides that proves nothing. If Apple isn't scared, why are they trying to get the courts to prevent Samsung from selling a much demanded competing product. Sorry if this shatters your fanboyish delusions.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Could you have found a more biased site. They readily admit they are paid by Apple.
Citation needed. If you can provide I'll happily ignore them from now on.
Besides that proves nothing.
If Apple isn't scared, why are they trying to get the courts to prevent Samsung from selling a much demanded competing product.
They are protecting their IP, it's protect it or lose it. I don't like the patent system as it exists but I also know it doesn't pay to try to be a lamb when you are surrounded by wolves.
Sorry if this shatters your fanboyish delusions.
Arguments, not insults please.
Re: (Score:3)
No, patents do not need to be defended to remain valid. You are thinking of trademarks.
Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (Score:4, Insightful)
Who makes the screens in the iPad? Who is begging who to please supply them with more screens?
I think Apple is scared, that it might not be getting the next generation of screens if Samsung has need for it themselves. If Samsung can make more money selling tablets then selling screens, Apple is screwed because Samsung is currently in the lead in the screen market especially oled.
Also, this isn't just about tablets, iPhone sales are lower then Android sales and Samsung sells a lot of Android phones.
Apple is trying to get rid of the competition. Same as MS did with IE and we all know how that worked out for browser users. Apple without competition would be as boring in its line-up as MS.
Re:Looks like Apple is starting to feel threatened (Score:4, Informative)
Who makes the screens in the iPad? Who is begging who to please supply them with more screens?
Multiple sources according to CNET [cnet.com] : "Industry online paper DigiTimes is also reporting that Chimei Innolux will also help in producing screen replacement units for iPads along with LG Display and Samsung Electronics."
I think Apple is scared, that it might not be getting the next generation of screens if Samsung has need for it themselves. If Samsung can make more money selling tablets then selling screens, Apple is screwed because Samsung is currently in the lead in the screen market especially oled.
Apple doesn't use OLED screens, Samsung so far hasn't proven itself in the tablet market unlike in the smartphone market and even there it can't touch Apple's volume. Doesn't seem so scary to me.
Also, this isn't just about tablets, iPhone sales are lower then Android sales and Samsung sells a lot of Android phones.
Apple is trying to get rid of the competition. Same as MS did with IE and we all know how that worked out for browser users. Apple without competition would be as boring in its line-up as MS.
I'll agree the gloves are definitely off and no punches are being pulled but it's no use blaming the player for the rules of the game. Patent reform is the only thing that will end this once and for all.
Re: (Score:3)
You are wrong, but i wont bother explaining why, just assume by the complicated sentences i put together, that i am smarter then you and shut up
There, i reworded your post a bit.
Honestly, i try to NOT be an asshole online, but whenever i see people trying to win an argument with a post that is essentially null in terms of content, i cant help myself
Re: (Score:2)
FTFY.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It's blocked UNTIL Apple can prove they infringed? Australia, crushing due process harder than the U.S. since 1996.
Fixed, Howard was elected in 1996
Re:Really? (Score:5, Informative)
Australia, enforcing US Patents and copyrights harder than the U.S. since 1994.
Fixed it for you.
Since an earlier Australian Government signed a 'free trade agreement' Australia has been in the interesting position of having to enforce US Patents and Copyright Laws above and beyond our own.
Plus the 'free trade agreement' between our 2 countries means that US companies (and individuals) are free to pretty much do as they wish here, but we are still considered to be foreigners and subject to all the various tariffs and import restrictions as any other country in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Non-Aussies probably wont understand this (Score:4, Funny)
Apple's legal counsel Christian Dimitriadis
Said the Ipad 2 was "fooly sikh" and that Apple "wants if fuckin money fuckin".
Meanwhile
Samsung's legal counsel Neil Murray
Said that Apple was being a "wuss and should harden up" and that their counsel was a "flamin galah" stating that this case was "a few tinny's short of a six pack". He also commented elected to inform apple on "where to stuff ya bloody law suit".
Re: (Score:2)
I actually found it rather amusing (unlike the disrespectful AC garbage generated by your feeble mind).
Applause sir,
That was the point (good humour, not the AC's feeble mind)
Re: (Score:2)
Sigh - this is what happens when articles/summaries are written by people with no idea how the law works. Do a bit of reading of the court's actual words, and generally about injunctions and discovery while you're at it. Slashdot always likes to make things sound more ridiculous/inflammatory than they really are.
Re: (Score:2)
Australia doesn't really suprise me anymore, but at least I know why now.
One thing that came out of the British media hacking scandal was an interesting article on News International globally. Well, it turns out, Murdoch owns 70% of Australia's newspaper market and a fair chunk of TV news ownership on top.
It's no wonder their country is politically fucked. Why on earth would you ever let one person control that much of any type of media? What utter lack of irrationality allowed the Aussies to let things get
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, politically we're a lot better off then the US at the moment. Our parliament can get things done and our tiny national debt is decreasing.
Despite what a few angry ultra-nationalists will say.
One thing that came out of the British media hacking scandal was an interesting article on News International globally. Well, it turns out, Murdoch owns 70% of Australia's newspaper market
Ever wonder why Newscorp is losing money hand over fist. Yep, they own 70% of the media but
Re: (Score:2)
Has the inquest in Australia got any momentum behind it though? I really want to see Murdoch's empire fall, but it already looks like the momentum here in the UK which was at the heart of it all has completely gone and it's back to business as usual sadly.
And they have to send 3 units? (Score:2)
What the hell? If you get sued you have to send three review units to your competitor for analysis?
Uhh... can I get three Galaxy Tabs if I sue Samsung too?
Re: (Score:2)
Samsung will provide Apple Australia with three units for study in coming weeks to ascertain whether or not the Korean gadget maker did in fact infringe on Apple's patented intellectual property
Even better, apparently Apple gets to decide if it infringes. Can't wait to hear their decision!
Re: (Score:3)
Samsung will provide Apple Australia with three units for study in coming weeks to ascertain whether or not the Korean gadget maker did in fact infringe on Apple's patented intellectual property
Even better, apparently Apple gets to decide if it infringes. Can't wait to hear their decision!
Not quite, Apple get a chance to prove it in court. The court gets to decide if the infringement has actually taken place.
If Apple cant prove their claims they open themselves up to a heap of claims for compensation by Samsung.
A very high stakes game of poker here, with the pot being measured in billions of Aussie dollars (about 1.1 USD).
Apple is getting real worried (Score:5, Insightful)
They've had a massive rise in profitability that anyone who isn't stuck in a cave can't have missed. However, what some people don't seem to realize is it has almost entirely been in a new market, consumer electronics, not their computer division. Their computer sales have gone up, but not near to the levels of their consumer electronics and only after the CE products made them a name.
So if they want to keep that profitability, and all companies want that, they have to keep that market.
For a time, no problem. It started with the iPod which became a fashion accessory. People didn't get MP3 players, they got iPods. It was what was cool to have and nobody could compete because nobody else could make an iPod. Well that market is pretty saturated these days. People don't buy new MP3 players all the time, and the iPod fashion has faded a bit (though it is still strong). So while it makes them money, it doesn't make them money like it used to.
Enter the iPhone and now iPad. The iPhone did great because it captured a new part of the smartphone market: casual users. Other smartphones were very business oriented, the iPhone was for consumers who wanted a toy. The iPad of course went in to a new market entirely, since tablets like it really aren't competition for full out tablet PCs.
All is well and Apple makes billions... However Android is a real threat to that. It has become extremely good and has been eating away at the iPhone market (and everyone else's). The tablet market was safe, but now it is entering there. It has a ways to go but is getting better at a rapid pace, Google improves it very quickly.
Apple is seeing their consumer electronics markets evaporate, turn in to regular commodity markets where you have to compete on price which Apple has never done well. This won't kill Apple, but it could seriously shrink them and companies view that as just as bad.
So they have to attack and try and stop it, in any way they can.
I just hope they don't succeed. I don't want a world where only one company can provide certain kinds of technology. Competition is nearly always good for the consumer.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, the post was mostly a joke, but if you want to get quantitative...
"Billions of Aussie dollars"... eh, yeah. Quick search shows consensus estimate of ~300k iPads sold in Australia. Let's be conservative and call that 500k tablets total, at $500 per unit that's still only $250M gross revenue, and even with Apple's absurd $200 profit margins that's under $100M net for the entire market. Samsung's share of the market is TINY right now, probably a few million in profit at best in Australia. Patent licen
Re: (Score:3)
A very high stakes game of poker here, with the pot being measured in billions of Aussie dollars (about 1.1 USD).
Oh, wow - I didn't realize Australia's currency had depreciated so dramatically! It's like the Weimar Republic all over again...
Re: (Score:2)
Depreciated? It's worth more now (or at least, it was last week) than ever before in its history.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think he was saying that the AU dollar is worth a tad bit more than the USD which is worth almost nothing these days.
Re: (Score:2)
A very high stakes game of poker here, with the pot being measured in billions of Aussie dollars (about 1.1 USD).
Oh, wow - I didn't realize Australia's currency had depreciated so dramatically! It's like the Weimar Republic all over again...
I meant 1:1.1 USD.
The world needs patent reform (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, if "Slide to Lock" deserves a patent, someone in the USPTO should be hit over the head with a hammer. Repeatedly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The world needs patent reform (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously, if "Slide to Lock" deserves a patent, someone in the USPTO should be hit over the head with a hammer. Repeatedly.
I think this may have already happened. It would explain a lot.
Re: (Score:2)
I think this may have already happened. It would explain a lot.
I believe the preferred method is to hit them over the head with a sack of money.
Re: (Score:2)
should be hit over the head with a hammer. Repeatedly.
Please cease and desist. You are referring to a patented business method.
Re: (Score:2)
prior art for "slide to unlock" - go to your local hardware store and get a "door chain" type locking device.
prior art for "hit over the head (...)" was posted in floppy.c from Minix: http://www.raspberryginger.com/jbailey/minix/html/floppy_8c-source.html#l00979 [raspberryginger.com] [raspberryginger.com]
However, just for kicks, I'll take one if you do indemnation for repercussions of using the patented invention.
Re: (Score:2)
prior art for "slide to unlock" - go to your local hardware store and get a "door chain" type locking device.
I think you'll find that this is *on a computer*, which makes it entirely different...
Re: (Score:2)
I think you'll find that this is *on a mobile device*, which makes it entirely different again...
Re: (Score:2)
And why not sue Nokia, as my N900 also has "slide to unlock".
Re: (Score:2)
I think patent law says anything can be patented with only the most cursory of oversight.
eg, the austrlian man who patented the wheel. [newscientist.com] Apparently there have been 30,000 patents granted by the US office concerning slight improvements on the wheel.
Australian Slide to Unlock patent (Score:3)
This looks like the patent here Unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image [ipaustralia.gov.au].
It's already in the process of being rejected due to a re-examination, "Claim 1 is not novel (and lack an inventive step) in light of the prior art document"
Although it doesn't help they have 21months before it will lapse due to the rejection.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the same patent office that initially accepted a patent on The Wheel [ipaustralia.gov.au] errr I mean a "Circular Transportation Facilitation Device". Ironically enough apparently when the patent was filed the guidelines for filing a patent specifically stated "There's no need to re-invent the wheel".
Re: (Score:3)
Patent This! (Score:2)
This (Score:2)
The patent system may be broken, but it is not the patent system that is killing technology, it is Apple. If they can't make all the money from it, then no-one can. I believe that is Mr Jobs' philosophy.
Well, Mr Jobs, you can stick your technology where the sun don't shine.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh noes, everybody does it, so it's justified, right?
the australian design is different (Score:3)
Look and Feel: OK if it's Windows, Bad if Android (Score:2)
Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (Score:4, Funny)
Thanks for the review Apple!
Yeah thanks Apple, and here's a brick for that walled garden. I bet you know just where to stick it, but so that you don't infringe on any patents, be sure to stick it SIDEWAYS.
Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (Score:5, Interesting)
Samsung didn't copy Apple any more than Apple copied a whole bunch of previous products. Samsung has definitely improved on what Apple has done and that is why Apple is feeling threatened.
I have both an iPhone4 and a Galaxy S. The Galaxy S running Android 2.3.4, which is what the SGS II ships with, looks and feels very different to the iPhone. It also provides a much more useful tool than the iPhone in that you can send files over bluetooth, use it as a mass storage device without needing iTunes, watch flash videos, etc etc. Apple knows this and they are scared.
Re: (Score:2)
Samsung didn't copy Apple any more than Apple copied a whole bunch of previous products. Samsung has definitely improved on what Apple has done and that is why Apple is feeling threatened. I'm not sure I agree [counternotions.com].
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
*slide to unlock*
Multiple devices have had this for ages - it's called the 'hold' switch (present on PSPs, old Sony walkmans, etc.)
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately, the standard for prior art on patents is not "It works kinda like that other thing I saw in a different context." - Apple's "innovation" in taking the hold switch concept and implementing it in a touch-based interface is sufficient for it to be granted a patent, for better or worse.
Re: (Score:2)
I think 'slide switch to unlock portable device, which has been around since portable casserre audio players, and CD players . Just about every 'portable audio device I have had since the '90s has had it. I now have a MP3 player with a touchscreen that has it. Are Apple going to sue (Eclipse/Trio) them too?
BTW I officially gave up on Apple in 1988
(a[art from the actual fruit and beverages made from them, I am still waiting for them to sue Enza )
Re: (Score:2)
Apple's "innovation" in taking the hold switch concept and implementing it in a touch-based interface
You mean like Windows Mobile phones have? The lawyers must be looking forward for the next lawsuit on this patent.
Re: (Score:2)
Windows mobile phones don't have slide to unlock. S2U2 mimics the iOS lock screen. In fact, there's an entire suite of apps to make WinMo look like iOS.
I was confused briefly because when I went to go google "Slide to unlock Windows Mobile" I didn't actually find anything that was native to Windows Mobile.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The wording is easy enough to find, it's a design patent though. The picture is the most important part, haven't found it yet.
Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (Score:5, Insightful)
Copying doesn't preclude improving upon, so that isn't what Samsung is accused of. Plus the two patents mentioned are for trivial UX features that are hardly ground breaking innovation in and of themselves.
Part of the reason that people are venting at Apple in this case is because yet again we see the absurdity of the patent and legal systems ably demonstrated by what is a pretty lame lawsuit (we think this product may infringe our patents, so ban all imports and give us full access so we can decide if this is actually the case or not - i.e. they're not even saying that it definitely infringes). I mean seriously, how on earth is sliding your finger across the screen to unlock the device something so amazingly innovative that Apple should be able to patent it?!
Another big part of the reason is that instead of competing by producing a better product and letting the market decide, Apple are increasingly hiding behind their lawyers. Their response to Android in general has been to sue rather than to find a better way to compete in the open market place. They could produce better devices, a wider range of devices, they could release the OS and allow other manufacturers to build iDevices, they could choose to specialise in various niches, they could try and revolutionise another market sector, etc. They have chosen to do absolutely none of those things, despite the end consumer benefitting from any and all of them, instead releasing relatively minor incremental updates to the same products and attempting to use the legal system to wipe out the competition.
The average consumer never benefits when a single manufacturer focussed on the premium end of the market is given free reign of entire classes of device. As a consumer, even an Apple fanboi (if you are one), you should be cheering on the competition knowing that it means more people will find the ideal device for them and that the competition will push all the manufacturers to keep improving their products at a far faster rate than if one company maintains a monopoly.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No, part of the reason we see people venting at apple is that they have brand loyalty to android, and they're too dumb to realise their bias ;).
Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
But if, say, Ford were to finally invent a flying car, and decided to register a patent titled "door lock... on a flying car". Would you be happy if Ford were then able to stop any other manufacturer from building a flying car simply because they held a patent on the door locks? Never mind that door locks had been on cars, Ford were awarded them specifically for flying cars.
This is what Apple has done. People invented sliding locks and mechanisms hundreds if not thousands of years before Apple copied thi
Re: (Score:2)
..Apple brings on litigation.. WTF?
Can't do better?
Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, talk about feeding the beast.
Galaxy Tab is sooo good even Apple's tried to stop its release!
Re: (Score:2)
Alert! Alert! Apple Fan Boy!
Re:Sounds like it's the one to buy then (Score:5, Funny)
No, no, no, that's a Troll. A proper Fanboi would go like this: "Apple make fantastic gadgets. They really know how to design the user experience. Samsung are just copycats, one step up from KIRFers."
And an Astroturfer would say, "While I'm a Samsung user, and I love their products, I have to side with Apple on this one. Samsung did, after all, copy the iPad in many ways, and you have to give it to Apple, they're the only real innovators in terms of UI and technology."
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah because Apple are saints, Sony is run by clones of Mr Rogers, Microsoft cares more about it's customers than profits and Rupert Murdoch is just misunderstood.
All corporations are corrupt and vile. Some of them are just better at hiding it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Yes, I need to see this Galaxy Tab then (Score:5, Insightful)
Samsung are clearly infringing on Apple's right to be the only tablet device manufacturer. Just like IBM should rightly have been the only computer manufacturer.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Believe me, I understand how business is done. They get patents. We get patents. Everybody has patents. Usually, nobody sues because everybody has patents, but occasionally someone does and then all hell breaks loose. I don't need a "don't be naive, patents aren't evil, they're just the way everybody does business" speech.
The fact that that's the way business is done doesn't make it any less wrong. It's an awful world where you can't build a product because you might get sued by someone with a similar produ
Re: (Score:3)
http://damnyouautocorrect.com/ [damnyouautocorrect.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, come on.
Apple the corporate entity is a marketing monster, yes, and they are also a totally anti-competitive, control-freaks as well.
But to say they haven't made a decent product (or as one reply to you said "certainly not innovative") is absurd. They completely redefined the concepts of smartphones and tablet computers, and all of their competitors are basically scrambling to parrot their basic design innovations.
Do I agree with their marketing tactics, locked down platform, or stifling app store poli
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, come on.
Apple the corporate entity is a marketing monster, yes, and they are also a totally anti-competitive, control-freaks as well.
But to say they haven't made a decent product (or as one reply to you said "certainly not innovative") is absurd.
Actually, it's correct. They conceptualize and market, but a lot of the design work is outsourced, and all the production is done via contract. Apple, in fact, doesn't make decent product - because they simply do not make product.
Re: (Score:2)
the iPhone is just an iTouch with a phone glued on to it
Besides being irrelevant to innovation (it's the same company!), the iPhone was released before the iTouch, so it doesn't even make sense.
the iTouch is just a spiffed up Nintendo DS
The DS has a really simplistic single contact resistive screen. It's like saying digital HDTV isn't innovative because B&W CRTs were already invented. Multitouch capacitive screens and the UI design to make them intuitive on a small high res mobile device was what made
Re: (Score:2)
Facts are a little shallow today. Look up the Dynabook [osnews.com] idea from 1968, published by Xerox PARC as a research project in 1972. That's really the first concept tablet by Alan Kay(pro) who later became an Apple Fellow in 1984. Guess what he had a hand in there? The Apple Newton came out in 1993, as flawed as that was (if the Nokia N800 was a tablet, then so was the Newton).
The Microsoft/HP/Compaq tablet concepts showed up way after that in 2001. They were a joke relative to what we're seeing today - they were
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but more Android phones are sold than iPhones.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/196035/android_outsells_the_iphone_no_big_surprise.html [pcworld.com]
"Retail research kingpin the NPD Group is reporting that Android-based phones are now outselling iPhones. Or at least they did last quarter in terms of unit sales in the U.S. according to NPD's study, which found that RIM's BlackBerries held 36 percent of the market, phones running Google's Android had 28 percent, and the iPhone was at 21 percent."
Re: (Score:2)
I'm presuming that the patents in question were granted within the United States of America.
A few questions are floating around my head: * How exactly does United States patent law apply to a Korean company selling products within Australia?
The answer [wikipedia.org].
* Why is this not being addressed against Samsung within the United States where the patent was presumably granted?
It is. But with the Aussie dollar on the rise, Australia started to become an interesting market, so why not in Australia as well?
* Is this tied to the relatively recent free trade agreements between Australia and the United States? Is Korea not a partner?
Re. US - the agreement is not THAT recent (2004). Recent is only Australia as a patent battle ground.
Re. Korea: nope, in negotiation only [dfat.gov.au] – long after the FTA with US has been signed.
Re: (Score:2)
I presume that this is more rhetorical curiosity than real curiosity, but I'll go ahead and answer question #2 as well: they are pursuin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you can "steal" the UI just by looking at it, what valuable information do the patents hold?
And if the patents don't hold valuable information, how do they "promote the progress of
science and useful arts"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I love it how ACs come in here and try to re-write history [counternotions.com].
oh well a registered account, do you feel special? your link ignores everything prior to 2007 but just so you know the world did exist before the iphone.
were apple first with a touchscreen phone? No.
were apple first with a grid of icons on a touchscreen phone? No.
were apple first with apps on a touchscreen phone? No.
I can see you have difficulty believing that such things existed before 2007 and that these 'magical' things could not have been invented by anyone but apple, but samsung didn't 'steal' any
Re:...and...? (Score:5, Informative)
I love it how ACs come in here and try to re-write history [counternotions.com].
It's not just ACs that "rewrite history"; I was using SPB Mobile Shell with widgets and grids of icons [smartphonegurus.com] on a Samsung 830w back in Feb 2007 - well before the iPhone was released. Worked great, too - configurable, easy access, and even had a slide-out keyboard similar to the Blackberry phones.
As far as I can tell and remember, the iPhone was little more than a pretty feature phone - no apps (I was a regular user of Handango back then, plenty of apps for the WM platform), no Exchange support, no cut-and-paste, no multitasking, little more than what most LG and Samsung and Nokia feature phones offered. And considerably less functionality than the Symbian and Windows Mobile smartphones offered.
But it looked pretty, and Apple is great at marketing...