HP introduces new Apple iMac

http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/09/10/notefile/

by tomschlick • 14 years ago

201 247 14 years ago

While it definitely resembles an iMac, HP has been exploring the post-mouse era a bit with their Touchsmart series, and this could be seen as a cousin to that brand.

arrrg• 14 years ago

I think that’s exactly what makes this so strange. HP already was selling all-in-one PCs that did not look like iMacs at all. They could have continued with that – but for some reason decided not to.

jpxxx5• 14 years ago

In fairness to HP, the Touchsmart line is terrible. Bad build quality, BSOD's on first boot, awkward design decisions, atrocious touch experience, and literally forty preinstalled and thoroughly rotten "touch" apps that join forces with dozens of sludgeware packages to make the first hour of use punishing. The Spectre looks like a work of art compared to them.

(By awkward design decisions: there's a secret chamber that holds a secret USB port that's already got a secret USB stick in it that drives the radio for the included wireless keyboard and mouse)

lloeki4• 14 years ago

Here's another angle[0]. It doesn't even begin to ressemble an HP TouchSmart[1].

[0] http://www.engadget.com/photos/hp-spectre-one/#5256829

[1] http://img1.lesnumeriques.com/produits/23/3739/23_3739_2.jpg

indiecore• 14 years ago

To be fair looking at these it's a fair distance away from an iMac as well.

bkorte• 14 years ago

"Post-mouse era"? Really?

lalitm• 14 years ago

Downvote

thoughtsimple3• 14 years ago

The all-in-one doesn't look all that much like an iMac but the keyboard and trackpad sure look like they copied Apple.

veyron• 14 years ago

How would you envision a desktop trackpad that doesn't converge on the design of the apple magic trackpad?

bradmccarty• 14 years ago

http://www.logitech.com/en-us/mice-pointers/mice/wireless-to...

lloeki4• 14 years ago

There can't be any other possible design, can it?

http://technabob.com/blog/2011/09/13/logitech-wireless-touch...

floppydisk• 14 years ago

WACOM tablets http://www.wacom.com/en/products/bamboo.aspx

lloeki4• 14 years ago

Indeed, instead it just looks like an ACD.

http://www.apple.com/displays/

phren0logy• 14 years ago

I'm not sure if you are kidding, but I'm quite certain that my dad (who owns an iMac) wouldn't be able to tell them apart at BestBuy.

Tichy3• 14 years ago

You realize the second photo actually is an iMac, not the HP product? There is a huge white (or aluminium) bar at the bottom of the screen of the iMac, which the HP doesn't have. From the photo I'd estimate it is at least 10cm high.

If your dad couldn't tell the difference, maybe he needs new glasses? Or perhaps the money for an iMac was wasted on him and he could have gone with a cheaper (plastic instead of aluminium) PC.

thoughtsimple3• 14 years ago

I should have mentioned that it doesn't look like an iMac if you go to the Engadget article that TNW references. They have pictures from different angles and those don't look much like an iMac to me.

i.e. http://www.engadget.com/photos/hp-spectre-one/#5256830

jpxxx5• 14 years ago

Ridiculous. Other than the bezel color, bezel shape, metallic logo, logo positioning, aspect ratio, foot design, choice of materials, choice of finishing, keyboard design, key coloring, key layout, keyboard LED, keyboard footing, trackpad design, trackpad footing, keyboard battery chamber, and trackpad battery chamber, this is a totally unique design.

bjustin• 14 years ago

You make it sound like HP copied someone here. HP's designs just follow the natural evolution of computers.

MartinCron2• 14 years ago

Things like choice of materials and finishing aren't "the natural evolution of computers". There are deliberate design decisions to the brushed aluminum design, decisions that HP didn't even bother to make for themselves.

This product from HP is shameful.

doktrin• 14 years ago

I strongly disagree. These are aesthetic design choices, and are not fundamental to the evolution of personal computers. HP clearly copied the design of the iMac.

Note : copying does not necessarily == morally reprehensible. However, facts are facts.

siglesias4• 14 years ago

Isn't it funny people's habit of confusing evolution for design when it suits them?

philwelch8• 14 years ago

There's one computer that looks like the Apple iMac. Well, there was until HP came along and there was two.

Nrsolis3• 14 years ago

From the horse's mouth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

jpxxx5• 14 years ago

Irrelevant and misapplied. This tape was from an era where foundational ideas in personal and graphical computing were being hashed out. Concepts like pointers, modality, bitmapping, state representation, humane I/O, task management, and basement-level software plumbing were being worked out. Basically: how do you turn massive industrial installations into a comprehensible and affordable machine that can fit in a home?

Those decisions, insights, and the attitudes that evolved early personal computing have flipping zip-all to do with trade dress in the early 21st century.

nirvana8• 14 years ago

It is kinda astounding how often people use this quote and seem to think it means the opposite of what it means.

Steve Jobs is saying it is easy to copy. But if you're great, you steal the fundamental idea and do something totally new with it.

Apple didn't just copy the phones already on the market, they stole the idea of a cellphone and did something fundamentally different.

So different that we had 6 months of people saying it was going to be a failure, Ballmer going on the record saying there's no way they'd sell any significant numbers, and the RIM engineers telling upper management that the iPhone couldn't possibly work the way apple said!

Thats "stealing" -- doing something for which there is nothing comparable on the market, in Steve Jobs view.

Copying is when you look at a successful product and mimic it down to the millimeter.

rbanffy3• 14 years ago

When you copy, you do something others have done.

When you steal, you make something others have done yours. While Apple built upon the work of others throughout its history, they made their products so distinctive that nobody would say could have come from anyone else.

siglesias4• 14 years ago

"Stealing" in the sense that Jobs means it is a reappropriation of an idea from a seemingly unrelated field into the new one to solve a problem (typically in design it's a teaching problem).

That's why his example from the Macintosh days is about applying calligraphy to rendering typefaces on screen, or why later in the interview he talks about how Apple took great pride in hiring people with a diversity of backgrounds (ex. zoologists and poets)--all to maximize the probability that someone would make an unexpected connection and hence, innovation. It's a subtle point that I frequently see people overlook here, but anybody with humanities training will tell you that there is a tremendous difference between inspiration and plagiarism.

thezilch• 14 years ago

Or not... for example:

http://images.apple.com/imac/images/overview_allinone.png [0]

versus

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/09/hp-spe... [1]

Not limited by, but your key(board) comparison completely skips over reality.

[0] http://www.apple.com/imac/ [1] http://www.engadget.com/photos/hp-spectre-one/

artursapek• 14 years ago

That profile shot of the Spectre is a bummer. They made it so ugly. So top-heavy. I feel bad for the industrial designers who had to work on this small-minded disaster, they must hate their jobs.

powertower6• 14 years ago

> Other than the bezel color, bezel shape, metallic logo, logo positioning...

We can't have an HP logo in a circle because Apple has an apple that resembles a circle!?

We can't center an HP logo because Apple centers their logo!?

We can't have a metallic logo because Apple does that!?

We can't have a rectangular screen because Apple has one just in that shape!?

We can't have a silvery finish because apple has one!

We can't have a qwerty keyboard because Apple has one!

And so on.

Are you joking?

These are all done 100 times over. In combination with each other.

The only resemblance I see are standard design choices being implemented. Like a monitor on a stand.

ricardobeat4• 14 years ago

Oh, come on. If you make the same choices as your competitor for nearly every item, that's copying.

These "standard design choices" hadn't ever been common in other products. Were all designers suddenly enlightened at some point on what computers should look like? (oh, wait! they were, by Apple)

pmelendez3• 14 years ago

"These are all done 100 times over. In combination with each other."

That's exactly the problem. HP is using the same combination here, the resembles is obvious and the sad part is to give the reason to Apple on this :(

DutchessPDX• 14 years ago

Come on, if you covered up the HP logo on that thing you would have called it a iMac. That was absolutely my first thought upon seeing it.

Copying one thing, maybe two things is a coincidence, copying everything is flat out cloning a design without a lot of thought or innovations. Hell, they even copied the finishes on the metal.

jpxxx5• 14 years ago

Either you're being willfully obtuse, you're unaware of what the market for all-in-ones looks like right now, or else the entire tech industry is filled with dummies who aren't as observant and correct as you. Pick one.

(And while we're nitpicking, the iMac hasn't had a white acrylic chin in five years.)

HP has multiple different lines of All-In-Ones that have absolutely no resemblance to anything Apple makes, meaning they haven't ~chanced~ or ~evolved~ into doing this look. Even Vizio (a company that was dinged for -substantially- replicating Apple's accessory design for their first all-in-one outing) managed to use a completely different finish and different foot profile.

The gestalt of Apple's desktop lineup was needlessly duplicated by a company that has the talent and resources to do otherwise. Argue another angle.

mayanksinghal2• 14 years ago

BezelColor + BezelShape: the shape is similar but without the lower white area.

Metallic Logo: Nope. Appears to be a back-lit logo which is white in color [1]

Logo Positioning: Is similar but not the same. Apple's logo is not in the black frame region. They both are centered though, I give you that.

Aspect Ratio: iMac seems to be 8:5. This is 16:9

Foot Design: http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/09/10/hp-imac/ Check the last image.

Choice of Material/Choice Of Finishing: Someone pointed out on the thread that HP is using plastic and not brushed aluminum.

Keyboard Design: There aren't many side shots of the smaller keyboard from Apple but [2] looks different from Spectre One.

Key Coloring: White on White vs White on Aluminium Grey.

Key Layout: Is Also different. Have a look.

Keyboard LED: Cannot deduct from image, so I will give you that.

Trackpad Design: Yes similar from top

Trackpad Footing: Check the side shots, they are different

keyboard battery chamber and trackpad battery chamber: Sorry cannot see from the shots.

[1] http://www.engadget.com/photos/hp-spectre-one/ [2] http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/electronics/detail-page...

Edit: iMac has 16:9 screens as well. So adding that here.

jpxxx5• 14 years ago

That's an honest effort but not enough. Throw the Apple Thunderbolt Display and the correct Apple Wireless Keyboard into the comparison and points 1, 3, 4, and 7 evaporate.

You're standing on a single extra key, a logo that might be backlit instead of foil, a different trackpad/keyboard foot arc, and the fact that they used plastic designed to mimic a specific metal with a specific finish. It's not enough for most observers, and HP is right to take some lumps over this.

niels_olson3• 14 years ago

What kills me is there is a great touchscreen with dramatically different design headed to market, just need to add a CPU:

http://www.wacom.com/en/products/cintiq/cintiq24touch.aspx

zevyoura• 14 years ago

I think the Cintiqs are a little more expensive than a multi-touch monitor.

niels_olson3• 14 years ago

but why? I'm betting part of their cost comes from their limited scale.

goggles993• 14 years ago

so the Personal Computer industry is like every other industry. How is this news.

Don't manufacturers/designers in the fashion industry (sunglasses, clothing, hats, shoes ETC.) The auto industry, house design, art, home furnishing, appliance, Hollywood movies and sitcoms, advertising industry, landscape (I could go on and on) do the same thing?

Please stop with this...

publicfig• 14 years ago

Yet this is a site that mostly focuses on the tech industry so of course we are going to focus in on stories like this as opposed to other stories in different fields.

goggles993• 14 years ago

You are missing my point completely.

randall• 14 years ago

Fun sidenote, the sunglass industry doesn't actually copy anyone else... they literally OWN the entire industry themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica

Secret monopolies ftw. (LensCrafters' doctors have you buy designer glasses you need. Vertical integration gone wrong.)

jarjoura• 14 years ago

There is a slight difference though, you should still be able to tell distinctly at a distance this is an HP vs. a Mac. Having a high resolution display built into an all-in-one body makes sense to copy, but using the same color scheme regardless of materials with the same shapes makes it look like a copy of an iMac.

goggles993• 14 years ago

I am not disputing that HP made it to look like a Mac. I am only saying that this happens in literally every industry, yet we don't see headlines because some pair of Walmart imported sunglasses look like Oakleys.

goatforce52• 14 years ago

Yes, but there's more than one fashion house or car company that people imitate. It's not like everyone is wearing obvious Versace knock-offs and driving Ferrari clones.

As much as I love my Apple products and will probably continue to buy them, I wish some other people were coming out with interesting ideas that would gain traction.

upinsmoke• 14 years ago

It surprise me that it took pc makers this long time to finally copy macbooks and imac.

Sauce1971• 14 years ago

So everything "converges" to Apple designs because it is the end all designs of everything ... Or so say the anti Apple crowd in here and Samsung and other copycats. Disappointed with HP in this shameless look a like product.

ginko• 14 years ago

What's interesting is that HP also has the all-in-one Z1 workstations[1] that have a more interesting design than the iMac. What's especially nice about them is that it's designed so that components can be replaced.

[1] http://www.hp.com/united-states/campaigns/workstations/z1_fe...

nirvana8• 14 years ago

Maybe not an example of great or innovative design (other than the replaceable components part) but clearly something original. While we've seen black monitors before, the feet and the arm and all that are interesting and different.

Contrast this with the iMac "inspired" one and you can see that this Z1 looks the way it needs to for its function- while the iMac one is an attempt to copy apple's aesthetics.

Its a confusion of the purpose of design.

Apple makes their products look good, but they are designed for functional reasons, not looks. The Z1 is a design that is made for functional reasons as well.

rev087• 14 years ago

That's indeed a very, very interesting design. And it looks good to booth. I hope they're not abandoning that idea, this is the kind of innovation that really benefits the consumer.

snambi2• 14 years ago

Take a look at this one http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4500970

sirn• 14 years ago

"I have always regarded Apple products – and the kind words Jony Ive has said about me and my work – as a compliment. Without doubt there are few companies in the world that genuinely understand and practise the power of good design in their products and their businesses. [...] I am always fascinated when I see the latest Apple products. Apple has managed to achieve what I never achieved: using the power of their products to persuade people to queue to buy them."[1] --Dieter Rams (Braun designer from 1961 to 1995)

[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/8555503/Dieter-R...

nickm12• 14 years ago

I think Apple's clear use of Dieter Rams' design language is more of an "homage" than a "ripoff". The fact that the Apple products and Braun products are separated by decades and in different product categories makes a difference.

msbarnett• 14 years ago

Dieter Rams made toasters and radios, and Apple extrapolated his design cues to things he never made, like laptops and trackpads.

That's a far cry from HP taking someone's design decisions for a all-in-one computer, doing no extrapolation, and using them to make a competing all-in-one computer.

oemera5• 14 years ago

Comparing the design of a toaster with the Mac Pro design is not the same thing as comparing the design of a standalone PC with a standalone Mac. Especially if the company who copies had much different design before "everyone started copying Apple".

Inspiration is one thing but copying even the keyboard, mouse and the trackpad is a bit too much, don't you think? PC makers seem so desperate at the moment...

snambi2• 14 years ago

Apple took a design that was made 40 years ago and used it in their products. Ofcourse, Apple is not in radio or toaster business. It may be correct from the eye of a lawyer. But, if you show both these designs to someone who is neither affiliated apple or technology what would they think? It looks like a blatant copy to me. I'm pretty sure a lot of people would agree. We should not confuse good marketing with innovation.

nirvana8• 14 years ago

I think this is hard for engineers, software engineers probably particularly, to get, but there's a thing called a design language.

No question Apple has used Rahm's design language, they're unapologetic about it. In the past, Apple used Frog design to make a design language for Apple (you see this most notably on the Apple //c and products of that era.)

If Apple were mindlessly copying Braun products and selling turntables and radios that looked just like the Braun versions then we'd be saying that's very stupid and unoriginal.

But understanding the reason Rahms made certain choices and then applying that set of perspectives and perception of the utility of objects to another context, namely computers and accessories, is a very different thing.

Sure the calculator app on the iPhone is a clear homage to Rahms, but this is very different from the iPod which uses the same design language for a completely different product with different needs.

I think there might be a level of observation that engineers sometimes don't have, such that they think that "this just looks good" and "You're paying a lot for it being pretty" (which is funny about products that are actually cheaper, and have been for 1.5 decades.) This leads to being unable to tell the difference between samsung slavishly copying Apple's look, or HP drawing very heavily from Apple's look to an assumption that its the "only way this can be engineered."

The reason you think that it is inevitable that products would end up looking like the iPhone is because Apple makes them look inevitable-- eg: they are very well designed.

A very well designed item is perfect-- it is the perfect form for its functions.

But Apple's competitors are making different products, and if they were competent at design, they would end up looking very different-- are these not differentiated products in terms of function? Features? Obviously they are. But the reason they fail is they then try to slavishly make it look like the Apple product, which undermines the whole point of differentiation in the first place... and also forces the product into a design that was created for a different product.

Nothing is inevitable. Think of the history of mouses and how clunky they were in the 1980s-- and Apple's mice in the 1980s and 1990s had a great deal of human factors engineering and design in them-- they have always been well designed-- were each one of them the "ultimate" inevitable design? Obviously not.

wonderyak2• 14 years ago

I'd just like to add something: there are some of us that love nice (alternatively read: Apple) hardware but do not want to run OSX. Sure I could buy a MBP and install linux or Windows on it; but that is absurd. Mac hardware is designed to work with Mac software and it does a great job at that.

I really was hoping someone would do a nice job of making a macbook-like product without having to rip Apple off wholesale; I'm still waiting for this. No other laptop in the world feels as good to use as an Apple notebook.

Do you know how horrible every other trackpad in the world is?

Evbn2• 14 years ago

Why can't HP copy Rahm's language?

adamman• 14 years ago

So no one else can create a minimalist style keyboard without being accused of copying Apple?

ceejayoz• 14 years ago

That's like plagiarizing an entire novel and saying "what, I can't use the phrase 'it was dark and stormy'?"

Evbn2• 14 years ago

Its a commodity PC filled with Samsung guts.

xutopia• 14 years ago

Is the keyboard the only thing you looked at in this picture?

joe_the_user2• 14 years ago

This looks as much like an Apple as one PC clone looked like another PC clone years ago, which is to say "a lot but who cares..."

kmfrk• 14 years ago

If I have to boycot every company that does stupid shit, I'll have to manufacture my own hardware, if this keeps happening.

This goddamn industry.

stickfigure3• 14 years ago

Who cares.

This is getting ridiculous. Originality counts when buying art, not tools. This is a box with some electronics inside. Does it do the job better than other computing devices?

This is like complaining when Craftsman came out with polished metal wrenches that look just like Snap-On. Stop trying to make computing into a fashion statement.

gavinlynch• 14 years ago

While your viewpoint is in a way logical, that's just not how the average consumer operates. Design aesthetics absolutely do impact consumer's purchasing decisions, whether or not they are explicitly aware of it or not. Poor design can undersell a great working product. And vis versa.

veemjeem• 14 years ago

Design matters even when it's not art. There's a great little documentary called "Objectified". It's worth watching if you want to see a rebuttal for your opinion.

stickfigure3• 14 years ago

You misread my point about tools. Design has value. Originality doesn't. Nobody is complaining that HP's new product has bad design; in fact, they seem to be complaining that it follows Apple's good design.

This is petty vanity.

dagw• 14 years ago

He said originality doesn't matter, not that design doesn't matter. Design is very important, in fact it's probably so important that when faced between the choice of good design and original design it's probably best to err towards good design.

jentulman2• 14 years ago

I do care what my kit looks like.

Part of my consideration of price of the Apple kit I purchased was that it is prettier than a lot of other kit. I spend most of my life looking at it so I'd prefer it to be pleasing to the eye.

stickfigure3• 14 years ago

HP isn't making your kit any uglier. What you're saying is not that you care what your kit looks like, but that you want to make sure that the other person's kit looks uglier than your kit.

Ok, I get it. Computers are the new fashion item for the masses, and Apple is the current trendsetter. Don't whine when other companies follow the trend. You really aren't special because your handbag has little LVs printed on them.

notJim2• 14 years ago

> This is a box with some electronics inside.

Except HP tried this for years, and apparently decided it didn't work. It turns out that aesthetics actually do matter. After all, if they didn't, why would HP copy Apple at all?

commandar• 14 years ago

I think the reason this gets attention is that it's a symptom of one of the underlying problems with the PC hardware industry.

The big guys tend to be, for lack of a better term, lazy. It's not just that they copy, it's that when they copy, they tend to do so poorly and miss a lot of what made the original design good in the first place.

PC users have been suffering through bad design and questionable build quality for years, and rather than sit down and think through their designs, the major manufacturers have taken to making superficial copies of Apple's hardware.

This is the reason I've been so excited about Vizio getting into the PC market.

http://www.vizio.com/all-in-one/overview

http://www.vizio.com/thin-light/gallery

They've done a decent job of showing that it's possible to design nice-looking, well-built PCs without outright aping Apple. I actually think the AiOs are prettier than the iMac, personally.

Which isn't to say they're perfect. I own one of the 14" T+Ls, and while it's very good on the whole, it has some issues like a meh-tastic touchpad.

But it's still worlds better than what any of the established PC manufacturers have been doing, and it's kind of sad that a company that had never built a computer before has managed to design one that's better than most of what's being built by companies with decades of experience.

da_n• 14 years ago

Sorry, but this is pathetic, are you saying there is no application of human creative skill, no imagination, no expression involved when Ive (and team) designed the iMac? How is it not copying to take all these creative ideas and slavishly copy them?

To dismiss industrial design as only valuable as a tool, never to be considered art, is completely close-minded. Art is in the eye of the beholder, what is art is subjective, and last time I checked nobody made you in charge of what art is.

Edit: Expanding on my point, why not think of this instead as an art movement? A group of artists have agreed on general principles, but this does not give license to slavishly copy each other to the finest details, to make exactly the same paintings. They can use the same materials, the same paint, the same brushes, the same techniques, but not paint exactly the same picture. What HP has essentially done here is said "I like the Mona Lisa, let's make one exactly like that".

ender7• 14 years ago

This makes me sad for a variety of reasons. One, because HP are being assholes and making what is clearly a knock-off product. Apple has every right to be upset, and probably sue them for trade dress infringement.

And second, because everyone (on both sides) is going to be conflating this with Apple's UI patents, which are total bullshit and which they shouldn't be able to sue over. Ah well.

calpaterson11• 14 years ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Star

tjogin• 14 years ago

As you are obviously implying, Apple secured the rights to Xerox's technology, very much unlike HP.

goatforce52• 14 years ago

Apple paid to have access to PARC ideas:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Apple_Inc.#Xerox_PAR...

nirvana8• 14 years ago

I really don't think that posts that consist of nothing but a single link, like this one, should be acceptable. You link to a web page and don't make any argument. This is disingenuous.

It lets you pretend like you've taken a position or refuted the person you're responding to, but since you haven't actually said anything you can't be debated with. You can't be pinned down on saying any position, which means you can't be refuted.

Now, if you made an argument, and then linked to a wikipedia page to support that argument, besides the fact that wikipedia is not authoritative and is edited by amateurs, often with an agenda, that would be much better. At least then you're introducing potential facts to support an argument.

podperson3• 14 years ago

Please see my list of ways to reassign credit for everything Apple does to save time:

http://loewald.com/blog/?p=4423

After all, you don't want to just admit that Apple invented the rounded rectangle.

objclxt• 14 years ago

That's not really the same at all: hardware design and software design are very different legally. Apple didn't copy the physical design of the Xerox Star, whereas it's pretty clear that HP are 'inspired' by the iMac here.

Industrial design and software design are rather different.

nicholassmith• 14 years ago

This bubbles up every time one of these arguments appears, bear in mind industrial design around that point was heavily constrained by toolchains and what could be manufactured. This does not give Apple a free pass, they could have picked different colour plastic, or different proportions or a dozen other things.

Manufacturing has improved massively in 30 years, that's why the argument is about now and not then.

lispm• 14 years ago

The Xerox Star computer did not look like a Mac. That was a totally different machine.

rbanffy3• 14 years ago

Your comment would be fair had Apple built the Lisa to weight 100 pounds and boot in 10 minutes. If you never saw a Star in operation, I strongly suggest you watch one of the many videos available on YouTube. You'll see how little Apple borrowed beyond black letters on a white background.

And how unusable the Star really was.

toddmorey2• 14 years ago

I'm sad because there are a lot of great design solutions waiting to be discovered. I think a company the size of HP (and especially with their roots) should be able to provide the market novel and world-class design. The problem is that they don't want to take the risk anymore--they'd rather copy market-proven concepts. The modern film industry is in a very similar and sad spot.

ThomPete• 14 years ago

I wish HP saw your comment.

wonderyak2• 14 years ago

This is romanticising the film industry; it has not changed much in the past few decades. People remember one or two films a year out of THOUSANDS. It's always been that way; there are a few gems in a sea of the same old shit.

lambersley• 14 years ago

Is this a 'good artists copy, great artists steal' example? I get the sense they're underestimating the modern consumer. Even though the shape and color have been duplicated, the slightly educated consumer will likely notice the cheap plastics and same crappy OS that made up the beige boxes.

joe_the_user2• 14 years ago

I am not a lawyer but it seems to me that the concept of trade dress is being abused here.

Trade dress like trademark doesn't exist to protect design. It exists to prevent consumers from actually thinking they are buying a different product. However much of a "knock-off" this might be, can you seriously argue someone would actually believe this is an Apple? Seriously.

rayiner• 14 years ago

You don't argue it, you do surveys and see if it confuses people. Remember, trade dress doesn't just protect the dress as seen in store. It protects, e.g., someone noticing their neighbor's new computer that she says she is very happy with. I can totally see an unsophisticated consumer confusing the two.

systems• 14 years ago

so no one is now allowed to make silver screens and keyboards, they only allowed white, beige and black!

the design have differences, minor of course, but ... its just a keyboard and screen

nachteilig2• 14 years ago

It almost seems that we're to a point where we just have to accept this as an industry. The frequency of outright copies seems to be increasing, and there's not much the Apples of the world can do about it. Seems like this is common place on the web too, where various design memes (the ribbon thing, etc. etc.) eventually spread to a large number of sites. Given that Apple is still making boatloads of cash, it seems like this isn't reducing their incentive to innovate.

(Not that I'm endorsing what seems to be an outright copy)

glhaynes2• 14 years ago

The frequency of outright copies seems to be increasing, and there's not much the Apples of the world can do about it.

Well, they did just win $1.5 billion from Samsung…

nachteilig2• 14 years ago

Not much different than doing nothing about it when companies the size (and of the profit) of Apple and Samsung are the involved parties.

JimmaDaRustla2• 14 years ago

Apple preys on the ignorant. HP now preys on the ignorant of the ignorant who don't know the difference.

cloverich• 14 years ago

? Because they take design seriously? And another company wants in on their success? Is this not normal for design - cause i feel like it is. Company X finds pleasing design, others copy. Some other company / designer innovates, some other company copies.

I really don't know what all the fuss is about.

JimmaDaRustla2• 14 years ago

No, I meant the Apple consumers who make the decision to buy a product based on looks over most other factor due to their cognitive ability. Within that subsection of consumers lays an even more naive group of consumers who would buy an HP Spectre, not knowing the difference from an iMac.

jlarocco• 14 years ago

The headline confused me, then I checked the article and laughed.

Seriously, though, I'm really curious what HP is thinking here. I honestly can't imagine Apple not suing them over this. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with it, but after the Samsung/Apple iPhone lawsuit, it's pretty obvious Apple is going to defend their design IP in court.

It just seems like HP is inviting a big headache when there's a lot of other designs they could have used. Heck, they'll need to sell a lot of these just to cover their lawyer costs.

powertower6• 14 years ago

I'm still confused. What would they sue over? A qwerty keyboard? A rectangular monitor? Having a silvery stand? What?

I've looked at the two pictured presented and I don't see anything similar besides standard design choices.

glhaynes2• 14 years ago

I'm certainly no expert, but Apple successfully sued eMachines over the eOne that, to my eye, looks "inspired" by the then-current iMac, compared to this HP that looks like an outright copy of the now-current iMac. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EOne

A qwerty keyboard? A rectangular monitor? Having a silvery stand? What?

Surely you don't think that's the extent of the similarity, right? Nearly anyone that sees this machine and is familiar with the iMac is going to say "that looks like a copy of the iMac"; people don't say that about every machine with a QWERTY keyboard and a rectangular monitor on a silvery stand.

jopt• 14 years ago

> I don't see anything similar except standard design choices

How do you classify design choices as standard?

sequoia• 14 years ago

As a consumer, I couldn't care less. Android makes dropdown notification screen: good feature -> apple steals it -> yay. Apple makes slide to unlock: good feature -> android steals it -> yay. Honestly I'm more frustrated when the don't incorporate good ideas: Win7 & Ubuntu unity have awesome keyboard window management features and when I use OSX I find myself wondering why the hell Apple hasn't stolen these features yet. They are good features, your OS is WORSE for not having them (i.e. it's not just a "design choice" imo, window management/tiling is simply worse on Mac). I wish some pc manufacturer would rip off the MPB as faithfully as possible so I could have a decent linux notebook!

Listen to Steve Jobs v1, steal good ideas! Furthermore, this article only speaks to superficial "features", i.e. the look of the box, so I care even less. Insofar as it hurts consumers by confusing them, it's bad, otherwise I say steal and steal alike.

Assuming consumers are not confused/misled, is there any harm to consumers posed by this sort of copying?

notJim2• 14 years ago

There's a big difference between stealing and outright copying.

Android didn't see iOS and then steal every single of element of it, they looked to it for inspiration and incorporated the parts they liked with their own ideas. Same thing with Apple introducing new features to iOS inspired by Android or WebOS.

If HP had looked at Apple products, and incorporated certain aspects of the design (say, the matte aluminum finish), while adding their own ideas, people would be lauding them for moving things forward. Instead, we have this, which is an outright clone.

effn• 14 years ago

Slide-to-unlock was pioneered by Neonode long before Apple even considered going into the phone business.

thoughtsimple3• 14 years ago

Apple's patent references the Neonode patent. I don't think patent law works the way you think it does. Neonode's patent 8,095,879 was only granted in January 2012 (filing date Dec 2002.)

See the references on Apple's 8,209,637 patent. It references Neonode's patent 8,095,879.

highace• 14 years ago

I think this is a good thing. I know plenty of people who have bought an iMac because it looks cool, not because it's a Mac running OSX. Now people can have a machine that looks trendy like a Mac, but (I'm assuming) at a lower price, and without the hassle of having to install Windows on bootcamp afterwards (or learn how to use OSX and then complain when they realise it's not Windows).

cpeterso• 14 years ago

For Mac users looking for better keyboard window management, I recommend Spectacle. It's free and open-source:

http://spectacleapp.com/

mariusmg• 14 years ago

Yeah, Apple clearly invented plastic and shapes.

robot• 14 years ago

If I was HP I would be ashamed of releasing such a product. I would not want to be an engineer working there. Perhaps they don't have any engineers left which is why they are releasing such a knock-off.

victorbstan• 14 years ago

The marketing tag line being: "Sue us!"

sequence7• 14 years ago

Really this is worth getting worked up over. Honestly it looks a bit like an iMac, who cares, it's clearly not an iMac and the HP logo is an extra big giveaway for anyone who might be confused.

The aluminium iMac design has been around for 5 years now it's hardly surprising that what is obviously a good design is going to be copied by its competitors. Why all the wailing and gnashing of teeth?

duked• 14 years ago

I worked for HP in 2011 and at that time (after Hurd was fired) they were clearly making only a very small profit on the computer business and the different business units justified doing so to get brand recognition despite 1 digit profit margin (compared to double digit from the PSG group). But they had no will to compete on the consumer market, it's probably a change of strategy to try to make double digit profit margin on consumer device. The sad thing is they didn't even try to be innovative they just copy whatever Apple is doing.

You may agree/disagree with the patent system but you have to be really dishonest or blind to tell me it's not a copy of an Apple product. They will probably fool some family with it but I suspect the majority of people are going to buy the "original" Apple.

Really sad, HP can't stick a valid strategy or a CEO ;)

yuhong• 14 years ago

Yea, Leo tried to sell it which led to backlash. Luckily Leo was replaced with Meg in time to stop this.

stcredzero5• 14 years ago

The look of all-in-one computers is fluff. What people are doing with computers is the heart of the matter. Why aren't people doing more with such large multitouch interfaces available for so cheap? (I've seen all-in-one multitouch PCs for a little over $1000.)

I think one could do something really cool with statistics and scheduling programs using such interfaces. Why aren't more people using these things as little physical desktops?

philwelch8• 14 years ago

A big screen laying flat on a desk is uncomfortable to look at, and a big screen facing towards you like a computer display is uncomfortable to touch continuously. The term is "gorilla arm".

stcredzero5• 14 years ago

> A big screen laying flat on a desk is uncomfortable to look at

What about a "drafting table" setup?

> a big screen facing towards you like a computer display is uncomfortable to touch continuously. The term is "gorilla arm".

Please re-read my proposal as written by someone who's already aware of this.

rimantas• 14 years ago

Keeping your hands up or head down for long time sucks.

stcredzero5• 14 years ago

Funny, but I used horizontal workspaces with high-contrast stylus driven reflective display/interfaces for decades. When I was a kid, those were called "desks" with "paper."

Working like that for a long time sucks, but so does an "ergonomically correct" PC workstation. Also strange is that my girlfriend's RSI (non-carpal tunnel) is more aggravated by the PC workstation than it is by writing with pen and paper on a horizontal desk.

pooriaazimi2• 14 years ago

Let's turn to our wise friend Macalope[1] and hear what s/he said just last week:

    Samsung wasn’t copying Apple, it’s just that smartphones naturally evolve into 
    flat touchscreens with minimal buttons on the front and slide to unlock and 
    a virtual keyboard and an Apple logo on the back and oops we went too far.

[1]: http://www.macworld.com/article/1168385/macalope_the_sincere...

brudgers• 14 years ago

It's a different form factor. Unlike the iMac, the Spectre One contains electronic components in the stand.

A stand which is very "unMaclike."

Images here: http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/09/hp-spectre-one/

It's not as if HP just entered the all in one PC market.

And this one may get something the iMac's probably won't - a touch screen.

RandallBrown• 14 years ago

Yeah, it does look quite a bit different in most of the press shots than it does in the first post of the blog. Similar, but not enough that I would be that upset about it.

The keyboard and trackpad though? Blatant ripoffs.

fellowniusmonk• 14 years ago

Yeah, the profile of this machine looks radically different than the profile of an iMac.

People forget that almost all all-in-one desktops are effectively just clones of past flatscreen stands/mountings, with computer bits crammed in, the bended metal stand of the iMac already existed as a mounting choice for some monitors, then from a design standpoint Apple effectively just stuck an extremely thick monitor on the bended stand.

The only exception to this was the sunflower iMac, which I don't remember seeing any monitor with a stand/mounting system anywhere close to it (though perhaps there were some in the medical field that had similar types of articulating arms, just mounted to hard surfaces), and of course even that mounting system wasn't that different than many amazing lamp/mirror designs, they just stuck a monitor on the end instead of a lamp/mirror.

This whole design recrimination thing is rather silly way to treat these design choices. Any field that has similar bare minimum elements/requirements and is focusing on functionality instead of artistic flare, only has a small number of design choices within the chosen design philosophy. Minimalism when applied to tools will only produce so much variation, the stand on this thing itself certainly qualifies as being quite different.

rootwyrm• 14 years ago

So where's that iMac with the multi-touch gesture capable IPS display again? Looking, looking...

What's that you say? Such a product has never existed? Apple has never made a touch screen iMac? Oh dear.

What's that you say? HP introduced their first TouchSmart system featuring a polished aluminum housing with integrated display and touch screen on JANUARY 7, 2007, putting them only 8 months ahead of Apple's release? (IQ770. Look it up, kids.)

CURSE YOU, FACTS!

exogen• 14 years ago

This is about trade dress, not features. Multi-touch and IPS are irrelevant.

And the IQ770 looks like a hideous product Apple would never, ever make: http://www.strongengineering.com/images/products/detail/hp40...

MBCook• 14 years ago

Oh my god, that's a real picture.

When I pulled it up, I figured it was one of those "Here's the kind of thing PC maker build" pictures, where a bunch of irrelevant things are put on because people might want them. It had to be a joke image.

Nope. It's on Amazon[1]. Their picture looks a tad better though. Were there any industrial designers on that project?

[1] http://www.amazon.com/HP-TouchSmart-IQ770-Processor-SuperMul...

tspiteri• 14 years ago

While they are similar in some ways, they are not as similar as the article makes them out to be. From images I found elsewhere, the iMac seems to have its components behind the screen, and a very thin stand, while the Spectre One seems to have its components in its thick stand, while its screen is thinner. I think the article is misleading by not showing that, which to me makes them completely different designs. As for the keyboard and trackpad, of course they're going to try to make them as small as possible.

egsmith2• 14 years ago

HP Makes the TouchSmart line which is an all-in-one computer and is not similar to an iMac so clearly they know how to do original design. So what they heck were they thinking when they released this product? Did they think no one would notice? It boggles the mind.

egsmith2• 14 years ago

I was curious how the fashion industry deals with this problem.

I mean when is a pair of slacks a knock-off, a copied design, and an original design. I would think the clothing fashion industry would have way more experience with this.

This came up via Google: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/04/business/worldbusiness/04i...

Somewhat old, but it reads just like these Apple v. whomever stories. Unfortunately it looks like they landed on the same solution as the tech industry; litigation. But now that I really think about it, what else can one do?

jsz0• 14 years ago

HP deserves to get roasted in the court of public opinion on this one. Absolutely pathetic. This is the type of stuff no-name Chinese fly by night companies do to make a quick buck hoping they can trick consumers into buying the wrong thing. It's so shameless I'm surprised they didn't change their logo to a pear or something. If HP has any self respect left they need to just discontinue this product now and publicly apologize to Apple.

nileshtrivedi• 14 years ago

I wonder why there was no such furor when refrigerator companies copied each other's designs.

css771• 14 years ago

In my opinion, the computer itself looks nothing like an imac. The keyboard, and touchpad however, do look exactly like Apple's equivalent products.

wethesheeple• 14 years ago

It's what's on the inside that counts.

zmonkeyz• 14 years ago

This all-in-one is ok but their Z1 workstation is actually pretty nice. It actually has easily accessible internals.

onetimeuse001• 14 years ago

<start pathetic argument> I can't believe Apple is suing HP for making a computer with a keyboard, mouse and a monitor with round corners. Apple is a patent troll, suing instead of innovating</end android fanboi argument>

shanemhansen• 14 years ago

Congratulations HP, and good luck with that.

I realize that many HN readers (including myself) are working on their own products which are almost indistinguishable from what came before and what will come after, and we hope that no competitor will ever be able to get a slice of our pie, but if I put on my consumer hat for a minute, here's what I have to say:

Thanks goodness most cars have round wheels, steering wheels at chest height, and reasonably similar control layout. Had that industry developed in today's environment they'd all be suing each other left and right over door handles that pulled upward to open the door and sun roof patent licensing deals. Who knows, maybe back in the day they did.

Thank goodness for wintel and competition. How dare people look down their noses at the market forces that produced a sub 1k laptop (or sub 400). Many people, myself included, are pretty lucky that the "race to the bottom" resulted in home computers that we (or our parents) could afford, allowing us to eventually become part of the hacker community.

Congratulations to Apple for making a beautiful high end product, but the fact that their product is beautiful and high end should be all the market advantage they need/deserve, and if they can't out compete imitators like HP, they don't deserve our business.

HP introduces new Apple iMac

Related Stories