15 thoughts on “7 things copycat Xiaomi blatantly ripped off from Apple”
Wow just wow.
If this is original design, then they’re about 1 year late to the party. With the launch of the next iPhone within weeks, it looks like Xiaomi is dining out on Apple’s leftovers. Some people just have to learn things the hard way.
But in their defense, Xiaomi is Chinese, and copying is in their DNA. The people of the PRC are just not allowed to have an original thought, let alone allowed to act upon it.
Whoa, now, bordering on racist there with the first sentence of that second paragraph.
Unfortunately, a lot of the people in the international spotlight lately who’ve been based out of China are charlatans and scumbags (and whose thefts are what bring them into the spotlight). Xiaomi is headed up by copiers, the Pangu team stole exploit information from a popular hacker for the iOS 7.1 jailbreak. It’s thoroughly disappointing, but I’ve seen a rather vile response from western audiences that has angered and upset average Chinese readers, and it only reinforces the divide.
I think the idea was not “Chinese people can’t invent”, but that “the Chinese government doesn’t like independent thinking”.
(I take this from the mention of the PRC specifically, and take “DNA” to be meant as cultural, not literally biological DNA.
I.e. a statement that modern Chinese political culture discourages independent innovation in favor of copying successful foreign works.
That seems both absolutely plausible from observation – and not remotely racist.)
The camera on is just ridiculous.
I just keep remembering will Apple finally added notification tray, copying Android’s style, the faithful said “there are only so many ways to do it and this one was right.”
Chinese artists have been trained to imitate the masters for hundreds of years. how? by copying. it’s part of the Chinese cultural identity.
I almost got mad at this since I’m a sinologist, but it’s too funny in its complete lack of basis and is likely an attempt at trolling.
If not, feel free to read up on a list of Chinese inventions and how many of them predate Western analogues by centuries.
The Chinese government has zero problems with individual thought– they just don’t want to hear that you’ve turned that thought turned against the state. Yes, I find this objectionable too, but the belief that they don’t want original ideas (in this case, for consumer products) makes no sense– of course you want them. Even in the strictest, most pragmatic sense, it gives you the opportunity to monetize something. It means there’s less objection in the West, and you deal with fewer lawsuits at home and abroad. Best-case scenario, it changes how you live or work, to the benefit of society (even if it’s just your own).
I think you’ve missed the implication there. The point on the camera lens is that it looks like it’s not a photo of a product, but a synthesized picture. Based on the exact look of the lens it looks like they synthesized the camera part of the picture by using Apple’s icon.
I don’t know it I agree with that, though. I have limited experience with camera lenses. I looked at my camera lens from a bunch of angles, and both the Aperture and product photo look fake to me. But but they look same fake to me. Are they? Is it possible to get to get the Aperture icon, poorly skewed, when you take a real photo of a lens? Or is this maybe stock art?
As for notifications, I think the real argument isn’t really that there’s only one way to do it. It’s that Notifications on Android weren’t original, but copied from the guy Apple ended up hiring for iOS notifications. How do you score that? I have no idea, but I don’t think it’s as simple as “Apple copied Google.” Maybe you could say Apple copied webOS, but I think that would be stretching it. Apple copied both Android and webOS, and had the guy who created the thing Android copied do another take on it? Or Apple just had the same guy do something new?
If there were design patents here, I would think they’d be webOS’s.
Apple’s shade was definitely a copy of Android. Whether you see it as “take 2” from Dillinger or not…it was a rip.
It’s just silly to me. They do look alike, not denying that, but the thought of them going out of their way for an obscure app many people don’t even know about to sell a device to Mac and non-Mac users is a reaaaachhhhh of the highest order.
The whole thing is hilarious to me. They say they didn’t rip Apple so now the dogs are on the hunt picking through every single pixel they produce to say “YES YOU DID!” #ridiculous
We’re not talking about the app; we’re talking about a direct theft of copyrighted artwork. Yes, that matters.
Wow just wow.
If this is original design, then they’re about 1 year late to the party. With the launch of the next iPhone within weeks, it looks like Xiaomi is dining out on Apple’s leftovers. Some people just have to learn things the hard way.
But in their defense, Xiaomi is Chinese, and copying is in their DNA. The people of the PRC are just not allowed to have an original thought, let alone allowed to act upon it.
Whoa, now, bordering on racist there with the first sentence of that second paragraph.
Unfortunately, a lot of the people in the international spotlight lately who’ve been based out of China are charlatans and scumbags (and whose thefts are what bring them into the spotlight). Xiaomi is headed up by copiers, the Pangu team stole exploit information from a popular hacker for the iOS 7.1 jailbreak. It’s thoroughly disappointing, but I’ve seen a rather vile response from western audiences that has angered and upset average Chinese readers, and it only reinforces the divide.
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-qIjthg-6XAA/U88eyic0TZI/AAAAAAAAomg/LDDC5I9E6bU/s560-no/mono-galaxy.jpg
relevant
I think the idea was not “Chinese people can’t invent”, but that “the Chinese government doesn’t like independent thinking”.
(I take this from the mention of the PRC specifically, and take “DNA” to be meant as cultural, not literally biological DNA.
I.e. a statement that modern Chinese political culture discourages independent innovation in favor of copying successful foreign works.
That seems both absolutely plausible from observation – and not remotely racist.)
The camera on is just ridiculous.
I just keep remembering will Apple finally added notification tray, copying Android’s style, the faithful said “there are only so many ways to do it and this one was right.”
Chinese artists have been trained to imitate the masters for hundreds of years. how? by copying. it’s part of the Chinese cultural identity.
I almost got mad at this since I’m a sinologist, but it’s too funny in its complete lack of basis and is likely an attempt at trolling.
If not, feel free to read up on a list of Chinese inventions and how many of them predate Western analogues by centuries.
The Chinese government has zero problems with individual thought– they just don’t want to hear that you’ve turned that thought turned against the state. Yes, I find this objectionable too, but the belief that they don’t want original ideas (in this case, for consumer products) makes no sense– of course you want them. Even in the strictest, most pragmatic sense, it gives you the opportunity to monetize something. It means there’s less objection in the West, and you deal with fewer lawsuits at home and abroad. Best-case scenario, it changes how you live or work, to the benefit of society (even if it’s just your own).
I think you’ve missed the implication there. The point on the camera lens is that it looks like it’s not a photo of a product, but a synthesized picture. Based on the exact look of the lens it looks like they synthesized the camera part of the picture by using Apple’s icon.
I don’t know it I agree with that, though. I have limited experience with camera lenses. I looked at my camera lens from a bunch of angles, and both the Aperture and product photo look fake to me. But but they look same fake to me. Are they? Is it possible to get to get the Aperture icon, poorly skewed, when you take a real photo of a lens? Or is this maybe stock art?
As for notifications, I think the real argument isn’t really that there’s only one way to do it. It’s that Notifications on Android weren’t original, but copied from the guy Apple ended up hiring for iOS notifications. How do you score that? I have no idea, but I don’t think it’s as simple as “Apple copied Google.” Maybe you could say Apple copied webOS, but I think that would be stretching it. Apple copied both Android and webOS, and had the guy who created the thing Android copied do another take on it? Or Apple just had the same guy do something new?
If there were design patents here, I would think they’d be webOS’s.
Apple’s shade was definitely a copy of Android. Whether you see it as “take 2” from Dillinger or not…it was a rip.
Refresher on webOS notifications: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zplVSI0M93o.
It’s just silly to me. They do look alike, not denying that, but the thought of them going out of their way for an obscure app many people don’t even know about to sell a device to Mac and non-Mac users is a reaaaachhhhh of the highest order.
The whole thing is hilarious to me. They say they didn’t rip Apple so now the dogs are on the hunt picking through every single pixel they produce to say “YES YOU DID!” #ridiculous
We’re not talking about the app; we’re talking about a direct theft of copyrighted artwork. Yes, that matters.
Agreed.