I'm gonna wager a guess that the Sony "Viao" X505 didn't have an SSD, for one. But ignoring that for a second, the Ultrabooks literally *are* copies of the MacBook Air. We're not just talking about the concept of a super small laptop, which Sony obviously did years ago, we're talking about computers that almost visually-identical clones of the Air. So, no, the X505 looks nothing like the Air, except that it's small and that's it's a laptop.

Instead of farting out the word, "fanbois" any chance you have, how about you actually read what used2win32 said — "Do an image search for "macbook air" and look at the pics. Then do one for "ultrabook" and compare the images." God, you're an idiot.

Maybe they'd be doing better if they weren't named something stupid like, "Ultrabooks." Talk about a super-generic, utterly meaningless name.

wow, that really made my day. that was awesome.

I think parent has got the right idea. Computers (and learning, in general) can get really boring, really fast. The above method won't teach kids how to program from the age of 7, but there's a lot to be said for his method.

Microsoft's sales aren't poor because of a bad UI. They're poor, because Microsoft came in 5 years too late.

Without any information besides what you're providing right here, it's difficult for me to comment. However, even in the example you showed of the Samsung phone, I can see some icons that are clearly copied from Apple - the "Phone", "Contacts", and "Messaging" icons on the bottom. Given that the lawsuit also involved actual emails from Samsung talking about the iPhone, the judgement was based on more than the two links you provided. Other things that were probably mentioned:

Comparisons of the whole iPhone and Samsung UIs (like the icons)
Comparisons of packaging, and accessories
etc etc

To be clear, I don't love our patent system as it stands, especially if Apple is really getting a patent for "the rectangle", but saying Samsung didn't violate the law is totally bogus, even given the level of stupidity our patent system has reached.

Yeah, but Apple's not trying to sue Microsoft's or ban any of their phones; and guess what? They don't look like iPhones or Android phones; and maybe they're actually innovative?

Except Microsoft's products still suck; and Apple's don't. In the past, it was generally Microsoft who was getting sued, while now it's Apple doing the suing. And Apple has actually been innovating all this time, while Microsoft was always milking their monopoly while never coming up with anything new that was successful (No, not MSN, not Bing, XBox.... barely).

While Apple clearly doesn't have the right to do whatever it wants, the only area where it has a "monopoly" is with the iPad; and actually, Microsoft's mono-culture *did* win. Windows is *still* a monopoly on the desktop. That just didn't guarantee future success outside of that area.

So if you're indicative of your friends' opinions about Apple losing its credibility, maybe the problem is that none of you have any credibility.

You do realize that all those things on Star Trek don't actually exist in real-life?

The whole "Earth's Corner of the Galaxy Just Got a Little Lonelier" and "an alien Earth that might someday bear the boot prints of a future Neil Armstrong" angle is kind of dumb. Seriously, once we start talking about interstellar distances, whether something is 8 vs 4 light-years away is really irrelevant. Using another post's numbers, if we can achieve a speed five times that of the Voyager probes, it's going to take us 1,400 years to get to alpha centauri. but if we double our speed, it'll *only* take 700 years. So unless you're Methuselah or Nicholas Flamel, that's about 10 times as long as you expect to live.

Hey dumbass, it's not a straw man. His point was that since he isn't/shouldn't be forced to sell things that he doesn't want to sell, then neither should Apple. Pretty simple.

Never seen it before. I guess this case is important! lol

Yes, and last time I checked, even with bridges and ferries, people are generally disinclined to build directly on open water; and to the south, there are the San Bruno Mountains, Lake Merced, and Daly City (which is the only corridor out of the city). So yes, in other words, ~90% of the city's perimeter is a "wall."

Silicon Valley is not San Francisco.

Oh yeah, and you don't have to fucking drive everywhere, like in almost every place in the US. A person can actually walk to get places.