One of the most widely discussed topics in the tech world is the patent warfare that is happening in the smartphone and tablet world. I specifically want to discuss the ongoing Apple vs Samsung patent case being discussed over their tablets. This case has taken the limelight for many reasons; it is one of the few cases which has went on to the stage of jury based trial, and also because it has revealed interesting facts about inside workings of Apple. But there is also widespread disagreement if that the case actually has any merit.
It is widely acknowledged that Apple really invented the modern smartphone. It created a device which was completely about touch, using no stylus. It designed and implemented a smooth and intuitive user interface totally from ground up. After that, anybody who didn't have a touchscreen smartphone like that was immediately relegated to the last generation. There was definitely a lot of invention going on around here - starting from the electronics of the device to the design and, crucially, the smooth implementation of the the UI.
A couple of years later, Apple released the iPad. Unlike in the case of iPhone, iPad was largely rejected by the media in the time between it was announced and it was actually released in the market. Everyone said it was a large iPod touch, and will never sell. But turns out, just the different screen size makes all the difference. Though the UI was mostly same, access to larger screen space makes web surfing easier, and viewing photos and movies more pleasurable. But, here is the big question: was there any new technology in the iPad? Was iPad an invention? I don't believe so. Apple showed the world that there is use and there is market for a touchscreen device with a larger screen. It did a great implementation of the device, with most people agreeing that is still the case. But an invention, like the iPhone, it was not.
Then why is the Apple vs Samsung tablet case a patent battle? The only possible patent that can be new in the case of tablets is probably the design of the device. The Wired magazine recently discussed few of the patents covered in this exact trial. Here is one of the drawings from Apple's iPad patent. I am not sure how you reacted on seeing it, but I just went wow! There is absolutely nothing specific about that design.
The second thing that people don't really factor in into these discussions is the effort required in the implementation. People think that once you have the idea, implementation is easy. That is simply not true: implementation is really hard to do. Android itself is the biggest example: From version 1 to version 2.3 (Gingerbread), overall Android was not as good as the iOS. Nexus One with Android 2.2 (Froyo) was still much more inconsistent than the iPhone 4 - both in terms of design of small operations and in the performance of the UI and the apps. And I am sure Google must have had to work really hard to bring Android to what it is now in the form of Jelly Bean. Punishing Samsung simply because it chose a similar shaped rectangle is really an injustice to all the Samsung engineers who've worked hard to do its implementation. Even with their work, Apple iPad is still the better device; I've used both Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and iPad 2 and assure you Samsung's Honeycomb tablet had really bad performance in comparison to the iPad. Apple enjoys a monopoly like market share in the tablet market not without reason. Samsung is getting exactly what they deserve directly from the market.
Eventually, I am sure Apple must have realized that it is next to impossible to eliminate its main competitors from the market through patents. People will design around the patents. My guess is that Apple wants the public to think that the competitors are stealing its inventions. And going through the comments on many tech news sites and blogs, that really seems to be working. Their official line about how others "must not steal their inventions" is pretty catchy too!
No comments:
Post a Comment