Technology Reviews

Apple has come out with its so called ‘revolutionary’ product called “I-Pad”. The product has been a source of constant scrutiny from various corners. The criticisms of the device have outnumbered the reviews in the favour of product. Many believe that Steve Jobs has got it wrong this time and there doesn’t seem much scope for the device. Now to add to the growing sentiment, it has been revealed that the latest Apple offering could have violated a patent.

It seems that they were not careful enough to check for existing patented designs. In what may be the first case of a manufacturer cloning a device which was not even released, Shenzhen Dragon Brother Industrial cloned the Apple iPad three months before its launch. Moreover, the Chinese product seems to be a better product than the iPad.

The Chinese product has been named P88 , a name as inanimate and unrelated as iPad. The differences are further to be explored.

• The P88 has three USB ports in their tablet which means you don’t have to worry about docks and other hardware items.
• The Apple iPad has been severely criticized for inability to achieve multi-tasking which is seen as the primary disadvantage associated with iPad. The Chinese manufacturer comes with a technologically advanced product than iPad and offers multitasking.
• It even has a faster processor and runs on the Intel Atom N270 1.6 Ghz CPU. The RAM of  iPad is a secret and P88 reveals its specifics and has its RAM which amounts to 1GB (which, incredibly, is expandable to 2GB).
• The P88 also has a bigger LED-backlit touch screen measuring 10.2 inches sporting a 1024x600 resolution.
• It also supports Wi-Fi, and much like the iPad comes with optional 3G.
• Boosting its connectivity, it has a 3-in-1 SD, MS and MMC card reader. It also has ports for mic jack, headphone jack, network cable and external display interface.
• It also has a much larger disk drive with a capacity of 160GB.

The only negative associated with it is pathetically short battery life of just about 90 minutes.

This is a case where the device which is better still would be marred with low sales as compared to a a inferior product backed by a strong Brand. People would still go for the inferior product just because it is from the house of Apple. The brand value of Apple would work for iPad and might cover for the deficiencies in the device.

The company argues that they were the first to release the device and Apple has ‘largely’ borrowed their design for the P88. The company has come out with intention to file a lawsuit against Apple. It will be interesting to see further developments in this case.

Apparently, Apple didn’t do their homework properly and Japanese Electronic Giant Fujitsu has come forward with the claim that it owns the rights to the name iPad. This may raise another possible legal battle for Apple which is already fighting its case of Patent infringements of Nokia.

Still with all the issues involved Apple might survive this scathing attack on its product and may even prove this launch of new product to be a successful innovation.