tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post3249442445699955633..comments2024-03-19T08:36:55.274+00:00Comments on The IPKat: From iPhone to MiniOneVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-34902970716167255282007-08-24T16:25:00.000+01:002007-08-24T16:25:00.000+01:00I'm not sure that the iphone is really that good a...I'm not sure that the iphone is really that good an example of chinese counterfeiting skill. It seems to me that my Orange SPV M500 is physically and functionally very similar to the iphone despite being over two years old. As usual, apple's contribution is more a matter of marketing and packaging.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-72463862441354426582007-08-20T01:31:00.000+01:002007-08-20T01:31:00.000+01:00Which of Apple's IP have they been copying?If it's...Which of Apple's IP have they been copying?<BR/><BR/>If it's just the shape of the tihng, that's a trivial matter: Apple didn't invent metal and plastic boxes.<BR/><BR/>If it's the user interface, is that intellectual property anyway? If so should it be? Put it another way, would you like to live in a world where every car had to have a different arrangement of pedals?<BR/><BR/>If it's the actual software that goes in the iPhone, that's something quite serious and amounts to substancial copying.<BR/><BR/>Overall I'm not surprised that Chinese (or other) companies can put out improved versions of Apple products, since Apple's products are not really all that wonderful once you remove the Jobs reality-distortion field.cabalamathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16171752628996901766noreply@blogger.com