Notable Apple Knock-offs
Home » Notable Apple Knock-offs
Whether its the latest Apple product, the Sony PSP, or the Nintendo DS... you can be sure, if there is the slightest consumer interest in your product, factories around the world (usually in China) will be primed and ready to duplicate your latest thingamabob as closely as possible, and immediately sell it for half the price. Sometimes these knock-offs are pure counterfeit products, meant to bait and switch consumers, but there are also those that create similar products for a slightly different market, or honestly seem to think they've only been "inspired" by an industry-wide "trend" they've deemed popular.
Outside of the contentious debates around the iClone War , Apple has experienced a number of other product "copies" over the years, some of which they've litigated over, with varying results.
Apple iPhone vs. iPhone Clones
Meizu miniOne
While some might say that the Meizu miniOne was the first iPhone "clone", it is probably more accurate to acknowledge that while the device existed before the iPhone's January 9th, MacWorld debut, after the presentation, work was done to the design that made the phone look much like Apple's new device, in a dramatic fashion.
CECT p168
This phone is nothing if not a complete rip-off of Apple's new mobile phone. First appearing on the global trading website Alibaba and marketed as "Apple iPhone", before being taken off, the CECT very much resembles the iPhone, with a number of disconcerting exceptions. 1.) In uses a stylus and pressure sensitivity, not "touch". 2.) It has a number of buttons on the bottom, as opposed to Apple's 1 button. 3.) It runs Windows Mobile, although it is not clear if they have a valid license with Microsoft. 4.) Who knows?
An "unboxing" video has cropped up, showing off the CECT device. The origin of the video is highly suspect however, as the person (face not shown) demonstrating the device (presumeably for the first time), takes care to turn the screen away from the camera as the device boots up (cleverly masking information that might be useful in determining details about the device, and establishing differences between the device and the iPhone).
Add insult to injury, the CECT device goes the extra mile, and stamps a distorted Apple logo on the back of the device. Ironically, this gesture is the main criticism of those who buy Apple products, namely that as long as an "Apple logo" is stamped on the back, they will buy it. Somehow, one might think that at least in this case, the act misses the point by quite a large margin.
Hua Long's IP2000
Appearing April 19th, 2007 on a posting at the gadget blog Gizmodo, the Hua LongIP2000 immediately strikes a strong resemblance to the iPhone, for anyone familiar with both devices. For those that are not, Hua Long went the extra step of stamping a metallic Apple logo on the back of the device.
Apple iPod vs. Mainstream Competitors
When it became obvious that the iPod, even when available only on the Macintosh platform and not Windows, was a force to be reckoned with, many of Apple's competitors began moving hard to compete with it. The first and most obvious thing, was its card-deck form factor. Over the many years since that introduction, the iPod's form factor has been mimicked repeatedly from an assortment of players, like the Creative Zen Vision, the Toshiba Gigbeat, the Samsung Z5s, and the Microsoft Zune.
The best thing about good competition is that it doesn't simply knock-off a product, but successfully uses general industry trends (like "form factors") as a context to innovate. While having a similar form-factor is clearly a start, many of the iPods major competitors have done a somewhat decent job at steering clear of merely "duping" iPod customers into thinking they're buying an iPod (a transgression that may even warrant legal action). Despite less than stunning success, they've worked hard to establish their own branded mp3 players using their own compelling features and interface controls.
Sony, who garnered run-away success with the Sony Walkman in decades past, had been caught sleeping at the switch (or perhaps too far ahead of the curve) with the rise of digital media players. While its "Sansa" line represents a step toward iPod mimicry, its worth noting that Sony has apparently worked hard towards avoiding the release of a comparable product... hoping instead to strike upon its own unique form-factor or sidestep a limited digital media player entirely by concentrating on the Sony PSP portable gaming platform, which more than capably functioned as a portable media player while also battling the likes of the Nintendo DS and Gameboy. Many have nevertheless criticised Sony's motives as somewhat conflicted, as full embracing of the mp3 player paradigm seemed to conflict with its draconian views regarding the restricted usage of the music and media it publishes under its Sony Entertainment division. Sony, with its technology, software, and services like Connect.com, more than any other competitor, represented a blistering possibility of competition for the iPod. Unfortunately, for whatever reasons, that potential to attract customers through synergy remains largely unrealized.
March of the iPod Clones
It's brutal, its blistering, its incessant, its the march of the iPod
clones! I truly disturbing occurance for any manufacturer is to have
its product knocked off. It probably defies reason to attempt to fully
catalog the iPod clones currently on the market. Many are made by
competitors, but a choice few attempt to truly "copy" the look and feel
of the iPod. Since Apple released the form-factor of the original iPod
in the face of competitors like the Nomad Jukebox, which amounted to
the size of the then popular portable CD player, manufacturers have
fallen over themselves in reproducing the same "matchbox" look of the
Apple iPod. The other lines of the iPod, like the Shuffle and the Nano
(Apple's most popular line), have also experienced an unending barrage
of mickry.
Before proceeding onto other Apple products, here are a few notorious iPod cloners.
Apple iPod vs. Full Metal Mp3/Mp4 Player
xxx
Apple iPod Shuffle vs. Lux Pro Super/EZ Tangent
In March of 2005, a small Taiwanese company named LuxPro announced its own version of a familiar product at the German tradeshow CeBit. There is perhaps some irony in the fact that, at the time, CeBit, popular around the world as a prime showcase for new technology, had not had Apple attend its event as a vendor in over a decade (a hiatus Apple has chosen to break with the release of the iPhone in 2007).
Initially, LuxPro, with much media astonishment, chose to label its new product the "Super Shuffle". In short measure, details arose that implied that this tactic was in fact a ruse and that LuxPro never intended to produce a consumer product. According to reports, its actual intent, was to raise media attention for the electronic circuitry it had finished developing earlier that year. In spite of these reports, LuxPro renamed the "Super Shuffle" to "Super Tangent", and began a strategy of OEM and branded distributition. In a "shoot-out" published by CNET Asia, iPod Shuffle seemed to trounce its wouldbe rival, despite having demonstrably less features. While the Super Tangent won in the 2 of 7 rounds dealing with "features" and "ease of use", the Ipod Shuffle apparently won in 5 of the 7 rounds, on the the criteria dealing with "size", "performance", "battery life", "accessories", and "compatibility". The review indicated that a competitor with its own "screen" might actually make the difference were the iPod Shuffle to step into the ring again.
Since that time, LuxPro has released the EZ Tangent, adding just such a screen to its offering, while the iPod Shuffle has abandoned its previous form-factor entirely. In January of 2007, LuxPro won its fight against an patent lawsuit Apple had filed against it. Bolstered by its win, LuxPro deciding to immediately file a countersuit for 100 million in damages. Apple had previously failed to get a July 2005 court injunction, and in its petition to Taiwan's Fair Trade Commission. With the court ruling in place, and existing clients placing new orders, LuxPro announced that it would begin shipping 100,000 Mp3 players per month compared to its 2006 levels of 50k-60k.
- Super Tangent Review by Make Magazine
Apple iMac vs. eMachine eOne PC
sfdsfd sfsd sdfsd fsd
Apple Mac Mini vs. AOpen miniPC Plus (Pandora)
First announced at the Computex Tradeshow in 2005, the AOpen "miniPC Plus" or "Pandora" (as it was initially named), seemed to be yet another lawsuit waiting to happen. But, as Christmas approached it seemed that the AOpen Mac Mini clone would indeed be unencumbered by legal injunction, ready, and shipping in time for the holiday season. In a December review published by TrustedReviews.com, the verdict on the miniPC however, was that it looked good, but did not offer enough to beat out the MacMini, which ironically was not even running on the Intel chip-set at the time.
- TrustedReviews.com - Review of Evesham miniPC Plus
Apple Macintosh vs. Microsoft Windows
Mac vs. Windows or Apple vs. Microsoft "flamewars" have been as old as the hills. At Apple's 2004 and 2006 World Wide Developers Conference, the company promoted its MacOS "Tiger" and "Leopard" releases by resorting to banners that cheekily poked fun at Microsoft's much delayed OS release, "Vista". With statements like, "Redmond start your photocopiers" and "Introducing Longhorn" (a reference to Vista's internal codename) Apple earned a few snickers from its developer community and may have even helped to spur unflattering questions from the media during Vista's final release in 2007. Despite the popularity of Microsoft Office for the Macintosh, users have always contested that the Microsoft Windows operating system is essentially a cheap knock-off of the Macintosh OS. In that light its certainly helpful to review how we got to where we are today.
In 1984, Apple unveiled what would become the first commercially successful GUI based computer, called the "Macintosh". Bill Gates, then head of Microsoft, one of the Macintosh's early developers, was excited about what the Macintosh could do for the industry, and urged Apple to license its operating system to other PC makers. Not one to simply talk about the future, Microsoft successfully licensed elements of the Macintosh user interface from Apple in the creation of the first version of Microsoft Windows (version 1.0). In moving forward however, Microsoft decided not to bother continuing discussions with Apple. Hadn't Apple in turn acquired many of its interface conventions from its visits to Xerox, without the need to license them? When Apple saw that Microsoft Windows 2.0 had added distinctions like "overlapping windows", that began closely resembling its own operating system, it balked and filed a lawsuit in 1988 that would turn into a protracted 4 year legal battle over copyright infringement. With version 1.0, Microsoft had initially curtailed certain GUI features to satisfy Apple's concerns.
This was similar to what Digital Research Inc, had done with its MS-DOS release of "GEM" (Graphical Environment Manager), which had initially borrowed more heavily from the Macintosh. Apple sued GEM, eventually leading to DRI releasing a GEM/2 that did not contain the infringing elements. GEM however went on to be licensed to Atari, eventually becoming the OS for the Atari ST called TOS.
In Microsoft however, Apple did not find a sparring partner that would fully back down. As Windows graduated from its roots as a stand-in for IBM's up and coming OS/2 operating system, to its own formidable force... it saw competitors like GEM receed, and sales sky rocket. Apple's lawsuit against Microsoft would eventually end in defeat, but years later, Steve Jobs would publically settle the score between Apple and Microsoft. After severe downturns in its business, the departure of its CEO, Jobs returned to the company, and while on its rocky road back towards profitability, Apple entered into agreements with Microsoft that would settle outstanding issues once and for all. The agreement concentrated on 5 important points:
- Patent Settlement / Cross License - Covering all patents that existed and are file in the next 5 years
- Microsoft Office on the Macintosh - Committment to parallel releases and ongoing support
- Internet Explorer - Default Browser on Macintosh
- Java - Collaboration, insuring compatible implementations (virtual machines)
- $150 Million Investment - Microsoft purchases non-voting stock in Apple
"The era of setting this up as a competition
between Apple and Microsoft is over as far
as I'm concerned." - Steve Jobs, MacWorld 1997
From its release of the Apple II as the premiere desktop computer, to its failure to prevent Microsoft Windows/PC compatibles from taking over, Apple has had a number of bitter pills to swalloweven as it launched a legacy that would become the Macintosh many love today. It continues however, to strive towards creating innovative solutions for the consumer marketplace.
- Early television advertisement of Windows 1.0 featuring Steve Ballmer
- Notable Litigation of Apple, Inc. - Wikipedia
- Apple vs. Microsoft - Wikipedia