[Steko]

See here's the fundamental difference:

Apple clearly differentiates their products.

Samsung intentionally copies closely.

No one serious would argue either of those points.

That is why Samsung is the defendant in all these design cases and Apple has never had this problem no matter how many times Engadget ditto heads want to bring up Steve Jobs "great artists steal" quote. When the judge holds up an LG Prada and an iPhone, Apple's lawyers wouldn't have trouble saying which phone is made by their company.

[tysonjennings]

Bald assertions do not a non "Engadget dittohead" argument make. Apple has never produced a new product category. They take the innovations that came before and throw money and Steve Jobs/Jonny Ives taste at it. You are blind if you think that what Apple does is real innovation in the sense of what the actual producers of the cellphone did. Or the tablet for that matter. They haven't had a fresh idea since Woz built the Apple I out of a block of wood and a circuit board 40 years ago.

[Steko]

"Apple has never produced a new product category."

"You are blind if you think that what Apple does is real innovation in the sense of what the actual producers of the cellphone did. "

Please cite where I claimed they did? Straw man much?

I'm just pointing out the difference between Samsung and Apple to you. They aren't the same. Apple clearly differentiates their products. Samsung aims for as little differentiation from the market leading designs as possible. It's true with refrigerators, washers, tablets, phones, etc. That's why the comment you were originally responding to disparaged Samsung.

You drew a false equivalence between completely copying a product and making a smartphone that's very different from other smartphones but apparently is just as bad because it wasn't the very first smartphone Moses brought back down the mountain. Laughable.

[tysonjennings]

So your argument is that Samsung is imitating an imitator. Excuse me while I don't care.

[Steko]

Just put whatever words in my mouth that make you feel comfortable.

[pndmnm]

> Apple has never produced a new product category. They take the innovations that came before and throw money and Steve Jobs/Jonny Ives taste at it.

Right -- or like we always say here on HN, it's not ideas that count, it's execution.

[tysonjennings]

I never said they didn't execute. Nice strawman though.

[vacri]

The fullscreen smartphone was a new category of theirs, wasn't it?

The cynic in me would also say that mp3 players that don't have a radio were probably also pioneered by them :)

[hahainternet]

Not really. I still have one of these lying around somewhere: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_TyTN

There were many other options, and as usual Apple simplified and minimised.

[jasomill]

As importantly, they retargeted the marketing. The iPhone was introduced as an entertainment and Web device. Prior to this, all the major players (Microsoft, BlackBerry, and Palm, as well as carriers) pretty much worked under the assumption that "consumers" weren't willing to pay for "premium" phones, so smartphones before the iPhone were designed for and marketed to "mobile professionals" with features like personal organizers and push email. At the same time, "premium" $250+ iPods were flying off the shelves.

But competing music players at similar price points were not, so I'd still tend to give more credit to Apple's execution than its "vision".