Mobile phones & tablets thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

The iPad 4 is out!


Wi-Fi
16GB £399
32GB £479
64GB £559
Wi-Fi + Cellular
16GB £499
32GB £579
64GB £659

---

Why have Apple chosen to be so confusing with names with the iPad?

iPad
iPad 2
The new iPad
Refreshed version of new iPad......

:crazy:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malbec

I agree.

I'm surprised some here aren't going nuts about Cadburys vs the Vatican's official chocolate maker that lost a legal case to carry on using Imperial purple to wrap its chocolates used in religious services. Cadburys vs God, surely that should ruffle a few feathers no?

---

There's a difference here. That purple is uniquely associated with Cadbury chocolate. Rectangles with corners which we look at and think "APPLE!!!!!!!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BleAivano

I actually have an example for that.

In Sweden we have a soft drink called (jul)must. The exact recipe are a well guarded secret by the family who owns it.
They have opted to not "patent" the recipe since that would mean that they would have to reveal the exact content of the recipe.

---

The difference being that no-one would want to know how to make Julmust, apart from to make sure that mixture of ingredients is not allowed to see the light of day - horrible stuff, eugghhh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malbec

As Henners said all this displays is a total lack of understanding of the most basic principles of the patenting process.

Name a single part of your computer that does not have a patent. In fact, name a single thing developed in the modern era that doesn't.

Patenting isn't a secret process, the information is out there to educate yourself about it. Why don't you?

---

Here's an example of something I consider worthy of trademarking.

http://www.pause.com/wp-content/gall...-ps-50a750.jpg

The Samsung "Touch of Colour" styling is unique and obviously a Samsung thing. Walk into a Currys or Comet and see a TV or monitor with that styling and you know it's a Samsung product.

If you saw a phone with a glass front and back and a metal band around it you'd know that it was an iPhone 4/4s. This is something I think is unique to Apple and which I feel that they should be able to patent. However I do not thing that the shape of the previous iPhones was anything unique at all and they shouldn't have been allowed to sue Samsung for something as general as the rough shape of their products.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

A different way of explaining what I was trying to say earlier, cheers :)
I think Coke and Pepsi is another good example of a recipe that was kept secret for decades. Its just an industry that patenting doesn't suit.

---

Definitely.

Don't get me wrong, I think that patenting is a good thing and trademarking too. I like the fact that I can go pretty much anywhere in the world and buy a black drink in a coke bottle shaped bottle and know that I'm getting Coke (well, you'd hope!!!!) :) and it would be a sad day when companies could just copy products to the exact detail and exploit the ignorance of those who don't know any better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I agree some patents awarded were down right silly but the question needs to be directed at the US patent office who issued it rather than blaming the company. If the patent was refused in the first place, then they'd have no case to answer. Is it a fault of the system or is it easier to blame a manufacturer like Samsung or Apple for being petty? That's the interesting part I think.

In my opinion they do already, just not every single person on earth agrees. If they accomplished that, it would be a first for any manufacturer in history. There are plenty of people like me who have been tempted away from their rivals and are happy to buy their products. If everyone thought like me though, there wouldn't be a competitive market.

---

But I think their aggressive protection of their products with some dubious patents/trademarks has harmed us in terms of competition. What happened to the Apple that brought things to market like the clickwheel (not an apple invention btw!) which was a far superior method of controlling your MP3 player than anything else I've seen. I had a U2 edition iPod and loved it, it was a great product although let down by iTunes and Apple's control freakishness :)

I agree that it's the patent office that really needs to be pulled up on this, but it takes two to tango and I think Apple does seem to push the boat out when it comes to vague patents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I own 2 Samsung TV's and the one in my lounge has the red round it like the one in the picture. A nice product and agree it should have a patent for that very reason.

I think the rounded corners and black surround case came to light when the first Samsung Galaxy came out and lets be honest it was very similar in appearance to the iPhone 3G at the time apart from a rectangular button. Samsung have since moved away from this type of aesthetic and developed their own style. It was a silly court battle but it appears to have pushed Samsung's innovation in a good direction. The S3 is a lovely looking phone so you could say that particular court case did the job nicely. I doubt that type of patent would be awarded now due to the damages paid out. It would be an easy return on the money, :)

---

Should people be able to patent minimalism though? I'll admit that the S1 and 3gs are quite similar. But when you put out a product that is so basic in design, I really don't feel that you should be able to protect it, because, well..... it's just a very basic design. I bought 2 2l bottles of Pepsi last night and I could be wrong, but they're pretty much the same as the 2l bottles of pop that all drinks come in. They're hardly designed at all are they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Thing is its not just Apple being aggressive. HTC, Samsung, Nokia and Motorola are doing exactly the same, although Apple probably started it all off. Google purchased Motorola originally to acquire its patents. Credit needs to be given to Apple for pushing the touch screen phone market in this direction and I think the reason they have been so aggressive is because its rivals have done so well. Lets not forget how crap touch screen phones were pre-2007. I had the LG Prada, and a previous LG before that and they were terrible in terms of responsiveness and the software was awful. I also had the Nokia Xpress music which I loved, but it quickly became dated. The iPhone kicked everyone up the bum and thankfully we have a market with so much choice. This whole patent war will no doubt force a change in the patenting system worldwide but if there are weaknesses then its the manufacturers job to exploit it. It does need to change. There's no gentlemen's agreements at this level regardless of how many consumers cry foul when they think they are not getting the products they want. :)

---

I agree completely. It isn't just Apple, but Apple seems to be the one getting big judgements for some rather silly patents.

Caroline had the same Nokia as the one you mentioned, it was good at the start and then.... well it wasn't!

I agree that Apple pushed the boat out and took touchscreen phones to the next level. Just like Audi, Toyota, Ford and Lancia brought 4wd turbo road cars to the masses in the 80's and early 90's but then they were eclipsed by Mitsubishi and Subaru who brought out cars which were better for the money and ended up more popular.

Would we be in a better place if Audi had been granted a patent on using turbocharging and 4wd together in a road car? *strokes chin*

Sorry guys I think you might find LG did the coloured strip round the edge of the telly 1st, although theirs was blue IIRC, in which case the idea of Samsung patenting it seems to be exactly what you are arguing apple are guilty of

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

Changing topic, does anyone here know if/how the Play store for Android differs for phones and tablets?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Should people be able to patent minimalism though? I'll admit that the S1 and 3gs are quite similar. But when you put out a product that is so basic in design, I really don't feel that you should be able to protect it, because, well..... it's just a very basic design. I bought 2 2l bottles of Pepsi last night and I could be wrong, but they're pretty much the same as the 2l bottles of pop that all drinks come in. They're hardly designed at all are they?

---

On the contrary, there are a lot of design elements that go into the likes of a 2 litre pop bottle. It just that it isn't heavily protected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robinho

Sorry guys I think you might find LG did the coloured strip round the edge of the telly 1st, although theirs was blue IIRC, in which case the idea of Samsung patenting it seems to be exactly what you are arguing apple are guilty of

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

---

True! But samsung seem to integrate it into the frame whereas LG have it as a separate strip :p

http://static.trustedreviews.com/94/...lh4000img1.jpg
http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-cont..._LCD_TVs-1.jpg

Plus Samsung's is red :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iOan

I didn't even know here was an iPad 3.

---

there iSn't, iThink iT's called the iNew iPad iNstead :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

The iPad 4 is out!


Wi-Fi
16GB £399
32GB £479
64GB £559
Wi-Fi + Cellular
16GB £499
32GB £579
64GB £659

---

cheers, now what's that in proper money ? :andrea: :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by donKey jote

hmm... looks like I'll be waiting for quotes on the iPad 4 :p

---

Don't Upgrade to the iPad 4

;)

Yes if you were thinking of buying an iPad anyway - then again it's not as if you have the choice of buying the iPad 3 any more.

If you think about it, Apple had little choice buy to ditch the iPad 3. Purely because of the move to the new dock connector, for Christmas you now have an iPad Mini with lightening and could have had an iPad 3 with 30pin, you aren't going to buy the iPad 3 because just because of the dock connector it appears well out of date, so they had to at least introduce a new version with the new dock connector, so that customers don't choose iPad Mini over iPad.

The article is right of course because there will be a lighter version out next year, but that's in a year.

So it's the Windows 8 and 'surface' launch tonight. Daniel; you getting one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

So it's the Windows 8 and 'surface' launch tonight. Daniel; you getting one?

---

I would really like a Surface Win 8 pro but there is no way that I could afford one right now.
And besides there are other things that are higher up on my "want list".

We're in the process of sourcing a new computer, and bang for buck nothing comes close to a good old fashioned laptop. Horses for courses, I appreciate, but IMO you still can't beat a proper keyboard and huge storage for actually getting stuff done. The tablet we got is fine for browsing and media viewing, but utterly hopeless for productivity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave B

We're in the process of sourcing a new computer, and bang for buck nothing comes close to a good old fashioned laptop. Horses for courses, I appreciate, but IMO you still can't beat a proper keyboard and huge storage for actually getting stuff done. The tablet we got is fine for browsing and media viewing, but utterly hopeless for productivity.

---

The beauty of the Surface Pro is that with the touch cover or type cover it can double as a laptop and a tablet. But the Surface RT doesn't have the power or compatibility of a laptop sadly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

So it's the Windows 8 and 'surface' launch tonight. Daniel; you getting one?

---

Of course not! I don't see the point in the iPad and this is just a Microsoft iPad. It's a device for consuming content and can't run x86 apps. If I was desperate for a tablet right now I'd probably put one at the top of my list because they're meant to be very well built and of course I'm a great fan of the Metro design. But iPad type devices aren't really my thing.

http://www.winsupersite.com/article/...parison-144545

Some useful tips
http://www.winsupersite.com/article/...l-guide-144590

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Of course not! I don't see the point in the iPad and this is just a Microsoft iPad. It's a device for consuming content and can't run x86 apps. If I was desperate for a tablet right now I'd probably put one at the top of my list because they're meant to be very well built and of course I'm a great fan of the Metro design. But iPad type devices aren't really my thing.

http://www.winsupersite.com/article/...parison-144545

Some useful tips
http://www.winsupersite.com/article/...l-guide-144590

---

The win 8 pro version can.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BleAivano

The win 8 pro version can.

---

Yes, but that's not out till after Christmas ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Clever marketing to release it for the Easter rush :)

---

If only Microsoft actually had the power to make people wait...... I suspect that Apple will be worried though, they'll probably trot out a slightly better iPad while Microsoft delivers a tablet that you can use as a tablet as well as a laptop which will be fine for most people. When faced with an iPad or Surface Pro, I suspect a few people might see the merit in a Surface.....

Surface Pro is the only tablet that I'm actually interested in, spec and software wise.

But then again, I keep thinking what a kick-ass gaming PC I could build with $1000. :p

Apple won't be releasing a new iPad until this time next year. I would have thought the introduction of the iPad 4 now would make that clear.

And yes we won't see a crossover iPad laptop type thing as after all Apple are just as keen to sell their various laptops as they are iPads.

But it is an interesting move from MS combining the mobile and desktop environments even if the likes of x86 vs ARM vs Desktop vs Metro... oops "New interface" means the whole thing is rather retarded. Apple still have completely separate mobile and desktop/laptop OS. Despite Jobbs claiming initially that the iPhone ran on the same OS.

(Well the kernel is probably similar but that's as far as it goes!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I don't think Apple are going to be worried. If they wanted to bridge the gap between laptop and tablet I'm pretty sure they would have attempted it by now. I certainly wouldn't buy a laptop and a tablet that looks and performs like a laptop, there would be no point. Might as well have a laptop and a tablet to take about. I think Apple are playing the safe game by sticking to their design philosophy and keeping the iPad for what it was originally meant for. After all they don't want to steal customers away from their laptop range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Why would you not want a tablet that could double as a laptop? If you could buy a cover for your iPad that turned it into a laptop then I bet you would!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I use the iPad to play a few games, do twitter and facebook, surf the Internet, store photos to show family and browse through myself, play music... I don't do CAD, photoshop, Lightroom, video editing, spreadsheets, reports etc on an iPad and wouldn't want to. They were purchased and have completely separate uses to each other. The ipad is a small convenient device that is easy to pick up and use instantly, and can be taken away with minimal fuss. I was given a 90 quid Bluetooth keyboard which worked fine, but it wasn't something I wanted to carry around. I eBayed it.

This is why I don't get the hardware arguments when discussing iPads. It's powerful enough for what I want it for and no I don't want it to replace my laptop. People who demand more power and built in keyboards are not the target market for tablets IMO. If the surface bridges the gap and fulfils those who want a 'tab-top' then it's a gap that will be filled. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

So if Apple was able to offer a product which performed the same as a tablet and also gave the functionality of a Macbook then you wouldn't be interested at all?

The thing about the Surface is that the keyboard is detachable so it's able to function just fine as a tablet, albeit with a built in stand and as soon as you clip on the ultra-thin touch cover, you've got something with a decent keyboard and a touchpad.

I know it's a common thing, but I just don't get your argument. This isn't some sort of hammer/pillow hybrid whereby it's a crap pillow and hammer because the two things conflict with each other. It's not going to be the worlds greatest laptop because obviously a laptop works better on your lap than a tablet, but for a relatively small outlay (£99 for a touch cover) you get a good chunk of laptop functionality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

If Apple were able to offer an iPad like you suggest, it would most likely cost more than £350 so no I wouldn't need it or be interested. For me it's just an in-between device that the wife and me share for the things I listed. I'm not a fan of everything Apple and would never spend more than 600 quid on a laptop for home use. That puts me out of Apples range. I like the concept of the present iPad and should it move towards Microsoft's direction or become stupidly expensive, I'll wait for mine to become obsolete and do without. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

but.... but .... but.... if Apple made a tablet like the surface then you could just.... you know...... not buy a touch cover and just use it as a tablet :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I could do, but I'd still only use it for the most basic of things. Would seem like a waste of money for me, and would hope there would be a lower spec'd model in the range. As much as you see mumblings that the iPad under performs and is going to be overtaken by rivals, I think there are others like me who enjoy it for what it is. Plus I like iOS experience so that's kind of a deal breaker :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

The surface RT isn't a higher specced machine though, it just has a stand on the back and a port on the bottom where the keyboard clips in magnetically. I wasn't suggesting that you buy a Microsoft tablet, I was merely asking why you wouldn't buy an Apple one if it had this extra functionality for no extra cost and still being just as good a tablet as before?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

This is why I don't get the hardware arguments when discussing iPads.

---

I think the reason why the iPad has been criticized in the past is because it's too expensive and underpowered for the things it's supposed to do. Apple has since addressed those issues by offering much better hardware in the latest iPads.

Believe it or not, many people do look at tablets as a laptop alternative. Otherwise it's just a smartphone on steroids.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I enjoy the touchscreen dependant experience maybe? Can't think of an easier way to explain it. As I said I got rid of a keyboard for my iPad. Couldn't be bothered to clip it on as an extra when a touchscreen keyboard pops up on screen anyway. Personal preference I suppose on that and not everyone thinks like me. I have nothing against the surface either btw, it looks a decent device. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

But that's the beauty of Windows 8 ;) It provides Windows 7 functionality for people who like using a keyboard and a mouse, then for people who like yourself prefer a touchscreen experience there are the metro style apps. Truly the best of both worlds.

the SIII arrived today... it rules ! :D :dozey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

The surface RT isn't a higher specced machine though, it just has a stand on the back and a port on the bottom where the keyboard clips in magnetically. I wasn't suggesting that you buy a Microsoft tablet, I was merely asking why you wouldn't buy an Apple one if it had this extra functionality for no extra cost and still being just as good a tablet as before?

---

Simply because many apple fans considers features that does not exist on an apple product as unnecessary.
They simple "don't need it" that is of course until that particular feature becomes available on an apple product,
coz' that is when that feature suddenly will become "revolutionary", despite that i.e. android might have had it
since its first version.

Hi Everyone. This is my current toy: Toshiba Ultrabook with i5 core :Toshiba Ultrabook

I just wonder how I would be better of with a tablet, rather than my ultrabook wich has a bloody good keyboard for me to exercise my fingers on. :)

Of course, as always, with these sorts of theread everywhere.

Apple user: I'm happy with my product :)
Anti-apple: You're an idiot! Fanboi! I hate you! DIE! :angryfire :

In other news Ibby's Dad bought an iPad 3 on Saturday, 4 days before the iPad 4 was announced. I did larf.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BleAivano

Simply because many apple fans considers features that does not exist on an apple product as unnecessary.
They simple "don't need it" that is of course until that particular feature becomes available on an apple product,
coz' that is when that feature suddenly will become "revolutionary", despite that i.e. android might have had it
since its first version.

---

Whilst I see where Henners is coming from in terms of the tone, BleAivano has a point. If Apple made a surface clone then it would be considered revolutionary and be successful for sure.

Tablets sounds like you are suffering form any disease. no interested