Posted on 11/19/2014 11:35:22 AM PST by Swordmaker
“Just months after selling its ailing handsets business to Microsoft, the Finnish company is planning to go back into the consumer market with a new tablet,” Matti Huuhtanen reports for The Associated Press. “It will launch a 7.9-inch device early next year in China, the world’s biggest market, before selling it elsewhere.”
“The device will be manufactured by Foxconn, which makes Apple’s handsets. And it will operate Android instead of the Windows software Nokia used on its cellphones when it began a partnership with Microsoft in 2011. That partnership ended unsuccessfully — in April, Nokia sold its cellphones unit to Microsoft for $7.2 billion,” Huuhtanen reports. “Sebastian Nystrom, head of at Nokia’s technologies unit, described the N1 tablet as ‘a new beginning for Nokia.’”
“The aluminum-cased tablet uses Google’s Android Lollipop operating system, and will retail for some $250,” Huuhtanen reports. “‘It’s pointing in the right direction, but there are some real challenges,’ said Neil Mawston from Strategy Analytics, near London. ‘It doesn’t have the distribution channels that others like Samsung and Apple enjoy, and nobody is making any profits in Android tablets at the moment.’”
MacDailyNews Take: A textbook example of Trade Dress Infringement, if there ever was one.
“After holding the No.1 spot in cellphones for 14 years, Nokia wasn’t able to meet the challenge when Apple in 2007 introduced the iPhone, and also began to lose the competition to cheaper Asian manufacturers,” Huuhtanen reports. “‘We are pleased to bring the Nokia brand back into consumers’ hands,’ said Nystrom. He hinted Nokia was also interested in producing an Android smartphone. That can’t happen before 2016, however, as the Microsoft deal included a commitment that Nokia not enter the smartphone business before then.”
“What do you have that is better than an Apple product. Go for it!!! Toot your own horn instead of wallowing in negativity”
Anything you try and like better is better than what you tried and didn’t work for you.
See? That’s how a conservative answers questions like this.
Apple cultists could never bring themselves to say the same.
You hate filled Apple haters piss everyone off...
You know, I’m also a “hate-filled”:
Homophobe
Racist
Misogynist
Science Denier
Climate apologist
As well. Or so I’m told. Illogical people tend to resort to stupid names like that when someone pokes a hole in their distortion field.
I have a few Apple and Samsung products and believe you me, the Apple products win every time. Samsung is close. Nokia will get close. But Apple beats them. Half of Taiwan is working in Cupertino so what do you expect.
You have a Windows7 phone? Why not sing its praises instead of doing your usual thread hi-jacking
You are jealous of Apple *everything ever since Tim Cook came out of the closet
Really? You are actually quite wrong about that. There were and are numerous trade dress lawsuits that take place yearly in our courts. There were many styles of those TVs you use as an example, but each trade dress was distinctive, not an exact copy of some other manufacturer's product. Yes, there were re-badged house brands made by one manufacturer sold to different retailers that looked exactly identical, but there could be no trade dress infringement there because the manufacturer owned the design while the retailer owned the TradeMark, or badge that would be put on the product. There was a lively design effort to make the sets distinctive
Everyone of those above has a distinct Trade Dress to distinguish itself from its competitor device. . . designed with Trade Dress to not to look the same. Those that tried to look like the market leaders were SUED for that attempt. . . and lost in court. Here is the legal definition of Trade Dress:
A product's physical appearance, including its size, shape, color, design, and texture.In addition to a product's physical appearance, trade dress may also refer to the manner in which a product is packaged, wrapped, labeled, presented, promoted, or advertised, including the use of distinctive graphics, configurations, and marketing strategies. In intellectual property law, a Cause of Action for trade dress infringement may arise when the trade dress of two businesses is sufficiently similar to cause confusion among consumers. In such situations the business with the more established or recognizable trade dress will ordinarily prevail. Two remedies are available for trade dress infringement: injunctive relief (a court order restraining one party from infringing on another's trade dress) and money damages (compensation for any losses suffered by an injured business).Like Trademarks, trade dress is regulated by the law of Unfair Competition. At the federal level, trade dress infringement is governed primarily by the Lanham Trademark Act (15 U.S.C.A. § 1051 et seq.); at the state level, it is governed by similar Intellectual Property statutes and various common-law doctrines. Both state and federal laws prohibit businesses from duplicating, imitating, or appropriating a competitor's trade dress in order to pass off their merchandise to unwary consumers.
To establish a claim for trade dress infringement, a company must demonstrate the distinctiveness of its product's appearance. Trade dress will not receive protection from infringement unless it is unique, unusual, or widely recognized by the public. Courts have found a variety of trade dress to be distinctive, including magazine cover formats, greeting card arrangements, waitress uniform stitching, luggage designs, linen patterns, cereal configurations, and the interior and exterior features of commercial establishments. In certain contexts courts may find that distinctive color combinations are protected from infringement, as when a federal court found the silver, blue, and white foiled wrapping in which Klondike ice cream bars are packaged to be part of an identifiable trade dress (AmBrit v. Kraft, 812 F.2d 1531 [11th Cir. 1986]). The legal Dictionary
In this instance, Apple has gone even further. The appearance of the iPad and iPad Mini are actually under a U.S. Design Patents, and are protected by patent law. Design Patents are not the same as Utility Patents. (The difference between Design Patents and Utility Patents.) A design patent cannot be invalidated by merely changing the badging or slight changes in button positions or minor other variations. There are NONE of the changes that would invalidate the Apple patents on Nokia's tablet. It is in direct infringement of those Design Patents.and Trade Dress.
I have seen people try to use a similar argument about the necessity for four wheels, brakes, and a steering wheel on early cars being somehow analogous to Apple's iPhone's multi-touch screens and the patents for it. . . but they are totally unaware that four wheels and steering wheels on cars WERE patented and other makers either licensed those innovations or went to extremes such as three-wheeled or six wheeled automobiles, and used tillers or other attempts to avoid licensing until the patents expired or knuckled under and paid the royalties to use the patents.
The loss to commerce of Counterfeit goods theft is an estimated 1.7 Trillion dollars a year. . . and Trade Dress infringement is just one step removed from counterfeiting. It IS intended to sell you products on the backs of someone else's design and is just one more step down the road of lawlessness and piracy. This is not legitimate competition. It is theft.
“You are jealous of Apple *everything ever since Tim Cook came out of the closet”
1) No.
2) You guys like their stuff so much. How do you like palming money into his hands? Seems like you guys have been running away from the whole thing since it came out.
I believe the only “FR purity approved” devices are Russian made computer hardware running Linux.
Haha! Hoho! That's rich. Stop...stop! Yer killin' me. I'm dyyyyyin'.
Find a new hobby. I give this advice to all haters
Talisker, Apple does not, ever, require you to "upload" your fingerprint to start your device. The fingerprint is not even stored on your device. A HASH representation is stored ON your device in a secure storage area on the chip in your device and never sent beyond your device. The hash is store in the "Secure Element" chip in your device. It goes nowhere else. Even if it did, the hash, as is your passcode, is entangled with your devices UUID and only works with it.
Your fingerprint is re-read each time and then a new hash is calculated, entangled with the UUID, and then compared with the stored entangled hash. If it is within parameters, the device is started. If not, it will not be. . . and you are required to use your passcode.
If someone were to be able to get a hold of the entangled hash, they could not reconstruct your fingerprint from it. . . ever.
On the other hand, Samsung's Knox Security DOES keep a photo of your fingerprint, and your passcodes in a clear text file hidden unencrypted in the their Libraries. . . and it can be found. Oops.
No pity from me. Haters are lonely and embittered. There are few threads for them, other than ones complaining about broken Android systems with problems. The loneliness draws them to Apple threads because they are numerous and cheerful. They drift into Apple stores in their free time to fondle the products, although they swear never to buy one. If they enjoyed non-Apple products they wouldn't be here on Apple threads. They are so miserable they have to try to spoil it for everyone else.
Here is the link to the information on Samsung's vaunted Knox Security being compromised:
"Samsung's Knox security layer for Android generates weak encryption keys, stores passwords locally and gives users login hints in a fatal "security by obscurity" design "compromising the security of the product completely," a researcher has detailed."
This was discovered after Samsung's Knox products were certified by the Obama Administration's NSA and the National Institute of Standards and Technology as acceptable for their "security and classified" document phone because of the security of Knox. . . and anyone can easily get into it, anyone. LOL!!!!
Apple's primary distinguishing features are often the look and feel on the outside, as well as on the inside. I have this 12" television with remote control still operating in my living room (not the actual pic). 1997 model, nothing else like it at the time or since. Oh, it also has a CD music player, subwoofer entertainment system and computer. But you would probably say Nokia and Microsoft had the same thing at the time (not). 
Note the TV/Mac button. 
Hi Dennis. I have an IPhone 5, soon to get a 6, and a year old Mac Book Pro. It works for me, and more than that, I don't give a rat's rear end what anyone thinks about it. If they have something else, and it works for them? Fine, it is their business.
FRegards
Windows 10 tablets will win over over everyone...... : )
Now if I can only figure out which 10” Samsung Galaxy tablet to buy as they make a gadzillion models of them!
I just came across racist pricing at Amazon...
White version $429 vs Black version $449
http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Galaxy-Note-Edition-Black/dp/B00F3SOHNU
If Samsung gives me a tablet then I promise not to riot!
Ironically, posted to the thread for an article about a non-Apple product.......
But I'm not a complainer and whiner like the Apple haters. I enjoy many different products from many manufacturers and have worked on many different computers since the 1960s. One of my hobbies is collecting vintage products. I embrace tech. Posting using a Samsung product...
That doesn't really change the fact that the article is about a non-Apple product.
There's been a few threads about Windows 10 posted recently and they've been rife with people having nothing good to say about MS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.