It's not companies who make similar looking successful devices. It is the consumers who decides which product they are buying and end up making similar looking devices successful. Take an example of car industry, TV industry, lighting, landline phones, shoes, cloths.. you name it and find it that average look of a consumable is decided by market demand…

i don't get it, what's the case about, all tablets will be rectangular with rounded edges, how can it be other than this?

It is not just the shape, it is the overall look and feel, and it is certainly a fact that Samsung “took inspiration” from the Apple line of products to build their own. Heck, they even copied the packaging!

It is not just the shape, it is the overall look and feel, and it is certainly a fact that Samsung “took inspiration” from the Apple line of products to build their own. Heck, they even copied the packaging!

most intuitive innovations like multitouch..was first brought to industry by apple..followed by others…even the tablet market was a dead space before ipad came in…apple clearly have a right…samsung saved millions of dollars in R&D..

most intuitive innovations like multitouch..was first brought to industry by apple..followed by others…even the tablet market was a dead space before ipad came in…apple clearly have a right…samsung saved millions of dollars in R&D..

Since apple has created a rectangular tablet it wants others to either create a circular tablet or none.

Since apple has created a rectangular tablet it wants others to either create a circular tablet or none.

Since apple has created a rectangular tablet, it wants others to not to create one or if anyone still prefers to create, create a circular one. LOL.

Since apple has created a rectangular tablet, it wants others to not to create one or if anyone still prefers to create, create a circular one. LOL.

Since apple has created rectangular tablets, it wants other companies either create a circular tables or none. LOL.

Since apple has created rectangular tablets, it wants other companies either create a circular tables or none. LOL.

Samsung has an at least 10x greater R&D budget as Apple does. They are second in the World in R&D Spending next to IBM. They also submit the second most patents next to IBM in the World!Samsung had a similar phone layout with a slide out keyboard prior to iPhone. Along with being the first to design a Microsoft Origami in 2006 as the first modern Tablet (UMPC Ultra Mobile PC) computing device. Q1 then evolved the look and feel that is on every touchscreen tablet or UMPC device out today! …..this is one category that Samsung was absolutely first in.In fact their design goes back before Apple's Newton. The GridPad was Samsung built in 1989 prior to Newton designed on their future Pen Master Pad and was their sole design!Check out Samsung's design firsts if you think Apple has a lock on innovative design. Of the more than 10,000 patents Samsung holds, I'm sure Apple is violating some of them!!!Besides the IDC Judges just ruled against Apple on HTC and Nokia. On this very same premise of look n feel. How does Apple think this will turn out any different than it's own failed lawsuit against Microsoft for the same thing in the 90's. The precedent has been set against having similar functional look n feel design features. That is on a full Touchscreen device (which both LG and HTC had out first), the layout and having 1 single button or no buttons on the face like Samsung's Q1 EX Ultra, with a mic at the bottom and speaker at the top of a screen is not patentable! …..it's simply the logical layout of such things on modern phones and tablet PC's!!!

Samsung has an at least 10x greater R&D budget as Apple does. They are second in the World in R&D Spending next to IBM. They also submit the second most patents next to IBM in the World!Samsung had a similar phone layout with a slide out keyboard prior to iPhone. Along with being the first to design a Microsoft Origami in 2006 as the first modern Tablet (UMPC Ultra Mobile PC) computing device. Q1 then evolved the look and feel that is on every touchscreen tablet or UMPC device out today! …..this is one category that Samsung was absolutely first in.In fact their design goes back before Apple's Newton. The GridPad was Samsung built in 1989 prior to Newton designed on their future Pen Master Pad and was their sole design!Check out Samsung's design firsts if you think Apple has a lock on innovative design. Of the more than 10,000 patents Samsung holds, I'm sure Apple is violating some of them!!!Besides the IDC Judges just ruled against Apple on HTC and Nokia. On this very same premise of look n feel. How does Apple think this will turn out any different than it's own failed lawsuit against Microsoft for the same thing in the 90's. The precedent has been set against having similar functional look n feel design features. That is on a full Touchscreen device (which both LG and HTC had out first), the layout and having 1 single button or no buttons on the face like Samsung's Q1 EX Ultra, with a mic at the bottom and speaker at the top of a screen is not patentable! …..it's simply the logical layout of such things on modern phones and tablet PC's!!!

Who brought internet, calling capabilities, SMS, music, camera bla bla bla to CELL PHONES. Apple also saved billions by not doing their own research.When people talk about Apple research, people don't understand that Apple is not a research organization. What it do is assemble items from various other organizations repackages it and sells. WHERE is the innovation? Innovation is only is UI level, otherwise technology wise there is no innovation in Apple.

Who brought internet, calling capabilities, SMS, music, camera bla bla bla to CELL PHONES. Apple also saved billions by not doing their own research.When people talk about Apple research, people don't understand that Apple is not a research organization. What it do is assemble items from various other organizations repackages it and sells. WHERE is the innovation? Innovation is only is UI level, otherwise technology wise there is no innovation in Apple.

Apple is in the thick of deep tech innovation. The Cocoa development platform is a very good example.In terms of mobile, Apple had the vision to see what could be accomplished. At the time multi-touch was a research novelty restricted to demos on wall sized screens. Apple realized that a multi-touch interface could unlock the power of mobile devices. Furthermore Apple was able to actually ship usable hardware with this interface! Nobody else had even conceived of anything remotely like this in 2007. In contrast, Apple was shipping it. One anecdote has it that RIM's engineers believed the iPhone introduction was faked, that the iPhone demoed wasn't a shippable device, but supported by a Mac in the back room.Apple showed the way and everyone else got in line to follow. That is the definition of innovation. How quickly people forget what mobile devices were like before the iPhone.

So, why doesn't the Galaxy Tab look like the Origami? Oh yeah, that's because the Origami sucked.

Point 1: Apple DOES license technologies that it doesn't own… including those used in the iPhone.Point 2: If you believe that “there is no innovation in Apple.” then you must think that the iPhone and iPad were copied from other smartphones and tablets that came out AFTER the iPhone & iPad. Perhaps Apple accomplished this by inventing a time machine, and going into the future to steal those concepts… but then you would have to consider Apple inventing a time machine as “innovative”

Not masters of their fate.

It's hard to imagine using Origami as an example of leading edge tech.

[...] copying the iPhone and iPad’s design in the Galaxy Tab and Galaxy S Android devices. Samsung called foul, and since then the two companies have been engaged in a seemingly endless legal back-and-forth [...]

[...] copying the iPhone and iPad’s design in the Galaxy Tab and Galaxy S Android devices. Samsung called foul, and since then the two companies have been engaged in a seemingly endless legal back-and-forth [...]

[...] duplicating a iPhone and iPad’s pattern in a Galaxy Tab and Galaxy S Android devices. Samsung called foul, and given afterwards a dual companies have been intent in a clearly unconstrained authorised [...]