Well, you can't blame him. It's clearly worked for Samsung. Samsung's devices have always been significantly more similar to Apple devices than any of its major competitors' have been. And guess what, they've also been the most successful. It's only logical that the competitors should move in this direction as well. Some would even say that it is fair to make things the same way as Apple has done them, on the basis of that Apple already found the best/öbvious way of doing things from the start. Even Google itself has been moving in that direction with Play, which was originally substantially different from Apple's App Store.
Is there anyone surprised that work at private companies is more successful than work in big government institutions? In other news, South Korea better off than North Korea, West Germany than East Germany, Taiwan than Mainland, Florida than Cuba,...
Why is there such an incredible number of advertisements for products like this on Slashdot these days? Surely no one actually considers it news that the latest model of some commodity consumer electronics product has a faster processor and more compact form factor than its predecessor.
And of course, we all know that this incredible breakthrough means that any health monitoring capabilities in future devices from a certain American company from Cupertino will only be late copies of awesome Samsung technologies like the Galaxy Gear and so many other wonderful innovations from this wonderful leader in consumer electronics.
Just what the doctor ordered after what happened with the 787.
If GNU/Linux is too detailed, then why don't people just call it GNU then?
Ok, I find RMS to be completely annoying, but I find myself being even more annoyed, at this point, by people calling GNU/Linux Linux. Linux is a kernel. Why do people continue to call GNU/Linux (i.e. the whole system) by the name of the kernel it uses? To me it's like if you were to call the Tesla Model S "Goodyear" or something because it had Goodyear tires. Would seriously like a person or two to explain what exactly the reasoning behind this phenomenon is, if indeed there is any.
I get scared as hell when I see people expressing themselves with this kind of tone in public and thinking there's nothing wrong with it.
So, in the end, basically all computers are iMacs, Macbook Airs, iPads, or iPhones now (some made by Apple and others not).
The majority of people who have bought Android tablets did so because they do not like Apple rather than because they wanted something with a smaller screen. Additionally, it is easy to forget now, but when the iPad first came out it was widely criticized as being too similar to an iPod Touch. It was only after quite a bit of time that it seemed to start to be taken more seriously despite having a screen with less than half the area of a "real computer".
drew30319 writes "NPR reports that a team of researchers at the University of Rome required a group of surgical residents to play video games on a Nintendo Wii for an hour a day, five days a week, for four weeks resulting in 'statistically better' performance than a control group for laparoscopic skills. The study includes some interesting stats (e.g. while the control group showed a 10% improvement in accuracy, the Wii-playing group's accuracy improved by 83%). The study's authors add that '[t]he Nintendo Wii may be adopted in lower-budget Institutions or at home by younger surgeons to optimize their training on simulators before performing real procedures.'"
I understand the effects of the parasite are related to cysts and the like that are produced and reside in the brain when the parasite is inactive. If you take the medication that kills the parasite, do you also get rid of the neurological effects, or is your brain possibly permanently altered?
What exactly are you saying is the way to promote innovation and discourage stealing? You seem to be in favor of innovators being protected, but you side with Samsung over Apple?
I care. I like to see people innovate. If there is no incentive to innovate, then it's stupid to innovate, because innovation involves risk and investment. When everyone can just sit back and minimize their costs by not innovating, instead only copying others as necessary to offset competitive advantages, then nobody innovates. Apple shouldn't be the only company developing these kinds of products. If companies could be secure that their ideas wouldn't be stolen then I'm confident we would see a lot more of these kinds of game-changer products. I want to see Apple defend their products vigorously, see other companies being encouraged to innovate more by it, and then see other companies out-innovate and have to defend themselves against Apple. That's all I want.
The iPhone completely revolutionized telephones and general personal gadgets unbelievably. They freakin took the risk of designing and producing a device no other company would (or at least apparently could) have dared produce. They freakin deserve to be able to protect their work from theft. If all one had to do to make the best products was wait for someone else to sink all the resources into coming up with and trying out new ideas, and then steal them and clone them, then naturally it would be a losing proposition for anyone to ever do anything innovative. We don't want this. We want companies to be able to invent revolutionary devices like iPhones without it being bad business. So Apple needs to and deserves to be protected. I'mbewildered by the incredible Apple resentment people have toward Apple. It's as if no one hear has ever had anything they did ripped off and taken advantage of by somebody in a manner that made them benefit at your cost. Don't tell me it isn't obvious these Galaxy phones aren't blatant knock-offs because we all know they are. Frankly, we all know Android immediately morphed into an iOS clone as soon as the iPhone was released as well. Don't tell me you think these phones wouldn't look and function 90% the same as iPhones if Apple hadn't taken the risk and investment. For the previous 20 years before the iPhone phones advanced a fraction of the amount they advanced when the iPhone came out. 5 years later and every phone's a damn iPhone clone. Unfortunately, patent law is the only thing we have to force companies to innovate. If companies like Samsung can't come up with their own ideas then they should be required to at least compensate other companies for the investments they have made in creating the ideas and technologies Samsung would like to rip off. I'm outraged by the outrage over this.