It now occurs to me that more amount of facts will ever sway an Apple user. they are brain washed, they will not accept any truth other then the one Apple feeds them. thsi world is doomed, seriously doomed. people can be made believe that a product that copies everyone is innovative….hope is lost, all hope is lost.
Just read an article in the New Scientist magazine. Not sure if I have the correct understanding of it, but it was saying people don’t like to be wrong, and telling them something that conflicts with what they want to believe won’t do much good. Or something like that, lol.
Jonathan Ive, Apple’s Senior Vice President of Industrial Design, has long admitted to being hugely inspired by Dieter Rams, a designer for Braun from 1955 until 1995 and their chief of design for 34 years. Ives even wrote the forward to Rams’s book, “As Little As Possible”.
Considering that that’s generally well known, I’m not really sure how the design similarities make Apple look silly.
It makes them look silly for suing others for doing what they’ve obviously done- borrow liberally from the designs of others. And these are just a few examples of design “borrowing”; it does not even touch on the fact that they have yet to develop a completely new technology or product since the Apple II; all of their tech has been “borrowed” from predescessors (sp?).
Copyright infringement would be a concern if the product is capitalizing on the same exact market. Their are 3rd party products in Apple store now, that look similar in design to Apple, but are not in the same market
It now occurs to me that more amount of facts will ever sway an Apple user. they are brain washed, they will not accept any truth other then the one Apple feeds them. thsi world is doomed, seriously doomed. people can be made believe that a product that copies everyone is innovative….hope is lost, all hope is lost.
Just read an article in the New Scientist magazine. Not sure if I have the correct understanding of it, but it was saying people don’t like to be wrong, and telling them something that conflicts with what they want to believe won’t do much good. Or something like that, lol.
I’m here to tell you, people have been brainwashed by ridiculous ideas far longer than Apple has existed.
I sense a religious reference here..
Perhaps Braun should sue Apple for copyright infringement…
lmao I was just thinking the same
pay it in nickels
All Braun no Brains?
Yeah, I’m one of those Apple people… but I like Braun stuff, too, so I find this hilarious!
Yeah, so…kinda not a big deal.
Jonathan Ive, Apple’s Senior Vice President of Industrial Design, has long admitted to being hugely inspired by Dieter Rams, a designer for Braun from 1955 until 1995 and their chief of design for 34 years. Ives even wrote the forward to Rams’s book, “As Little As Possible”.
Considering that that’s generally well known, I’m not really sure how the design similarities make Apple look silly.
It makes them look silly for suing others for doing what they’ve obviously done- borrow liberally from the designs of others. And these are just a few examples of design “borrowing”; it does not even touch on the fact that they have yet to develop a completely new technology or product since the Apple II; all of their tech has been “borrowed” from predescessors (sp?).
Copyright infringement would be a concern if the product is capitalizing on the same exact market. Their are 3rd party products in Apple store now, that look similar in design to Apple, but are not in the same market
Doesn’t matter. Apple is also suing a grocery store for using the image of an apple in their logo.
Cue Apple Corps, LTD.
Must be a slow day at the office? Meh article.
Look! The calculator app looks like this calculator, and both the iPod and this old radio are small, white rectangles! GASP! Scandalous…..
Apple should sue Buarn for retroactive patent theft. They need to make sure they never use thier ideas, they haven’t came up with yet, again!