Breaking News
News & Analysis

Apple, Samsung Allege Copying

Schiller on the stand
4/4/2014 08:40 PM EDT
4 comments
NO RATINGS
1 saves
< Previous Page 2 / 2
More Related Links
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Anand.Yaligar
User Rank
Author
Re: This is technology
Anand.Yaligar   4/12/2014 10:38:53 AM
NO RATINGS
In my opinion I think Apple should not complain too much on this copying issue, reason being, ideas at time are the same, the developers maybe went to the same school and as we know many developers do share ideas. I think Samsung should sue the speedy adjustments in the market of technology.

NEQT1
User Rank
Author
Never liked the swipe to unlock anyway.
NEQT1   4/8/2014 7:23:47 PM
NO RATINGS
I would prefer Samsung changing the unlock to 3 taps or something more reliable than the annoying swipe to unlock. Regardless of the IP issues.

Anand.Yaligar
User Rank
Author
Re: Justified
Anand.Yaligar   4/8/2014 2:44:08 PM
NO RATINGS
@hm, you raise a valid point but after reading this article to the end and checking a few of the links provided, am tempted to side with Apple over Samsung. It is an open fact that Apple were the pioneers of modern day Smartphones with the launch of the iPhone and a quick glance at the physical model of some of the latest Samsung gadgets reveals some very peculiar similarities to the former. So this may be an attempt by Apple to let the other competitors know that their patented features and applications are off-limits.

_hm
User Rank
Author
Is this good for Apple?
_hm   4/5/2014 7:46:47 PM
NO RATINGS
I do not like to read Apple Vs Samsung story. Beyond some point, Apple may suffer in its brand image.

 

Most Recent Comments
michigan0
 
SteveHarris0
 
realjjj
 
SteveHarris0
 
SteveHarris0
 
VicVat
 
Les_Slater
 
SSDWEM
 
witeken
Most Recent Messages
9/25/2016
4:48:30 PM
michigan0 Sang Kim First, 28nm bulk is in volume manufacturing for several years by the major semiconductor companies but not 28nm FDSOI today yet. Why not? Simply because unlike 28nm bulk the LDD(Lightly Doped Drain) to minimize hot carrier generation can't be implemented in 28nm FDSOI. Furthermore, hot carrier reliability becomes worse with scaling, That is the major reason why 28nm FDSOI is not manufacturable today and will not be. Second, how can you suppress the leakage currents from such ultra short 7nm due to the short channel effects? How thin SOI thickness is required to prevent punch-through of un-dopped 7nm FDSOI? Possibly less than 4nm. Depositing such an ultra thin film less then 4nm filum uniformly and reliably over 12" wafers at the manufacturing line is extremely difficult or not even manufacturable. If not manufacturable, the 7nm FDSOI debate is over!Third, what happens when hot carriers are generated near the drain at normal operation of 7nm FDSOI? Electrons go to the positively biased drain with no harm but where the holes to go? The holes can't go to the substrate because of the thin BOX layer. Some holes may become trapped at the BOX layer causing Vt shift. However, the vast majority of holes drift through the the un-dopped SOI channel toward the N+Source,...

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed