Apple v. Samsung: Surprises in Latest Court Documents

The five 'reveals':<p>1. Apple’s early vision for the iPad [...] were extraordinarily chunky and included a kick-stand<p>2. Google told Samsung that its devices looked “too similar” to Apple’s iPad. Google demanded “distinguishable design vis-à-vis the iPad for the P3.”<p>3. Apple made 23 to 32 percent on gross margins for iPads sold between April 2010 and March 2012.<p>4. The iPhone design was inspired by a Sony designer talking about "portable electronic devices that lacked buttons and other ‘excessive ornamentation,’ fit in the hand, were ‘square with a screen’ and had ‘corners [which] have been rounded out"<p>5. Apple researches consumer sentiment on existing products in order to optimize future designs.

Wired's article certainly presents Apple's side of the story. Although, the Samsung take is pretty interesting: <a href="http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120726121512518" rel="nofollow">http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120726121512518</a><p>Apparently, Apple argues that FRAND patents should be effectively free, estimating that Samsung's standards patents are worth less than 1¢ per device. Whereas, Apple thinks its design patents are worth $24 per device, and their utility patents are another $3 on top of that. Were that to hold, it would eliminate Samsung's profit margin. So, it's hard not to read this as Apple trying to cage viable competitors entirely out of the market through legal maneuvering.

Not good when your own designers are saying "too bad it looks like an iPhone". The Sony concept is interesting; it would be interesting to do a courtroom test (can the lawyers differentiate when the judge holds them up). I don't think it would e a problem with the original iPhone, but the iPhone 4 might be. Of course, Sony never created that product.

Article missed the biggest kicker, which is that the galaxy designs pre-date the iphone:<p><a href="http://i.imgur.com/KPGYL.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://i.imgur.com/KPGYL.jpg</a>

Is "revelation" really too tough a word for the authors of this article or the readers of Wired?<p>I really don't appreciate this linguistic trend in the tech community to turn verbs into nouns in a non-standard, <i>ad hoc</i> way when perfectly fine nouns exist. I (unfortunately) hear it with "ask" fairly frequently at work, and it makes me feel like Jules from Pulp Fiction ("Use 'ask' as a noun again, I dare you...")<p>Can anyone shed some linguistic light on this trend?

Hey Falling. You've been hellbanned. Your comments are not appearing to anyone except those who have "turn dead comments on". You may have been hellbanned for daring to defend Apple on HN, who knows since they never say, but they are really active at censoring people for having diverse opinions.<p>Just thought I'd share this in case you're still reading the thread... I can't even reply to your hellbanned comments alas.