LG Seeks Ban For Samsung's Galaxy Note 10.1 Tablet
Samsung had sued LG for its displays lacking innovation.
Continuing the ongoing legal battles between the two technology companies, LG is seeking a ban for Samsung's Galaxy Note 10.1 tablet.
An injunction filed today by LG details the firm's plan to ban Samsung's Galaxy Note 10.1 in Korea. The former alleges that the tablet's display panel infringes on certain patents it owns. LG said it filed the suit over Samsung's utilization of OLED displays.
The patents in question relates to the viewing technology used in OLED displays. The tech helps consumers better view the screen from any angle. As well as seeking a sales ban for the Galaxy Note 10.1, LG is also demanding damages of $933,000 each day in the event of "continued non-compliance".
Back in September, LG filed a patent lawsuit against Samsung, claiming the South Korean technology giant violated seven of its OLED patents. The latter meanwhile, filed its own suit against LG in November in hopes to invalidate the patents in question as they "lack innovation".
The biggest contribution they have really brought the mobile and tablet space if you really look at things is the phablet (Note).
On the software side they have made some incremental improvements to the Android OS, but if you look to Samsung to be a major innovator and change markets that's not going to happen.
Samsung can fab processors, are they fully able to replace ARM or Intel architecture with their R&D, of course not.
Samsung can make phones, can they bring some so drastic to the market place like the first iPhone, of course not. They can take a great idea like touch phones and run with it, but not produce anything of substance.
Can they build a major mobile OS? Bada is junk, but they can make incremental improvements to Android.
As far as existing products, exactly what device is better than the S3 offering the combination of:
A superior display
Removable, expandable storage
A replaceable battery
Gorilla Glass
Fast processor and graphics
Some devices have some of these things but I can't think of any that have all of them like the S3 and Note II...and to me...that's innovative.
HTC? Nope. For some reason they don't believe in removable storage or batteries in even their premium products. The DNA, nice as its display is and as fast as it is purported to be lacks decent battery life and they don't even mitigate that by offering a replaceable battery. Is having an anorexic looking phone that important? I guess so to some.
All manufacturers have a few bad apples, even Apple (their iPhone 5 leaves A LOT to be desired in my book and I really like Apple products, generally), but I've not had any problems with the multiple Samsung phones I've had. ...and for those that feel the S3's popularity is undeserved, please describe what is better and why.
Wow. As much as I want to disagree with this I can't. I think the S3's success is mainly due to its advertising. There are very similar phones out there like the Optimus G not getting nearly enough attention…
When you're on top....
This I am quite aware of. The chips that power their phones are not ones they have architecture.
They do what Apple and other companies do, take the ARM architecture, pay the licensing, then make modifications with their Engineering team to tailor it to their needs. They do not do the heavy R&D, ARM Holdings does.
The S3 is an awesome phone, don't get me wrong, but its not innovate.
Everything you mentioned in the S3 is basically in the S2 just its an update with the current available processors. There's nothing innovate about it. If you told me it had a camera on the front and could detect motions outside of touching to the screen, to me that classifies as innovation.
A superior display: Its resolution was nothing breathtaking, and its PPI was lower than existing smartphones that already sold tens of millions at the time.
Removable, expandable storage: this existed before, nothing special, the Galaxy S had this.
A replaceable battery: same as above, Galaxy S had this.
Gorilla Glass: same as above, Galaxy S had this.
Fast processor and graphics: They did a refresh, nothing beyond what
Let's not confuse incremental improvements with innovation.
If the S4 has a bendable screen, yes that's innovation, since there's no product with such a display. If it is the same ol' display just 1080p that's not innovation.
If the S4 is using completely new materials for its battery and is getting 2-4X capacity than competitors, that's innovation, not putting a replaceable battery that my 1990's Nokia could do, and the original Galaxy could do too.
I believe Samsung innovated by tying all those qualities together in one product. Just because the S3 may not be the innovative product doesn't mean the S2 wasn't innovative...or the S before that. The AMOLED was innovative even if it didn't have the highest ppi. Just because Apple didn't innovate with the iPhone 5 doesn't mean the iPhone wasn't innovative (see what I did there).
As for LG ... http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-57473852-92/six-lg-display-workers-charged-with-stealing-samsung-tech/
so ... whose tech is it really?
Anyway, now i see that the Android group (Samsung, LG, Google, etc) starts sueing each other, thought they were united by Google against Apple, but when it comes down to money, they start fighting. Divide and conquer.
and isn't this a phone for the last several years?
The major innovation of the iPhone was the first one. Changing the landscape of the mobile market. Now finger touch smartphones are the norm. This was the innovation of the iPhone, all subsequent iPhones posses little innovation afterwards. People thought having such a huge display and draining the battery after a single day was ridiculous now its the norm. Cellphones used to routinely last 2-4 days on a single charge. But the iPhone with its large touch display changed the game. Sure having ultra-hi PPI (retina) and a few other features were a huge plus for consumers but that wasn't the innovation. The Galaxy line and other Samsung mobile products do not poses such innovation, aside from the phablet which brought something new in the market as I mentioned previously.
The Galaxy S was not innovate at all. When it came out in 2010 there was nothing special about it compared to the competition.
The Galaxy S2 was also the same. The S3 was as a whole better than the competition, but that's like saying Dell just came out with a better laptop than the competition right now, that's not technological innovation, just providing a good product for the price. It did not change the mobile market at all.
These are great products, I recommend them as the best Android smartphone but in terms of technological game changing innovation, sorry there's nothing there with the Galaxy lineup.
You are right about AMOLED, Samsung has taken the lead in this technology, OLED were used years and years before Samsung in handheld devices.
Also, as for AMOLED, the Galaxy Line was NOT the first smartphone to use this technology.
Other smartphones used AMOLED before the Galaxy S was released.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_Droid_Incredible
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_Desire
Just to name some.
If you want to say AMOLED were manufactured first by Samsung and provided to other companies, that I can say is innovation (if it is true), but to say Galaxy phones were innovate since they used AMOLED first, that isn't the case.
The first Smartphone I had was in 2003 with a touch screen...HP made... then along came Apple saying they have a new Smartphone with iPhone... well it was a step on the way of smartphones that where around at the time... so innovation is good and will be done by the next smartphone/Tablet we are yet to see.
All I can say is keep up the innovation, as in the end we all win .. the users.. us, you and me