Proview has manufactured 20,000 ‘iPad’ devices, and this is how it looks

“Proview began work on its own ‘iPAD’ product in 1998, and guess what, it is an all-in-one computer that looks like Apple’s Fruity iMac,” Chris Chang reports for M.I.C. Gadget.

“While’s Proview’s iPAD (Internet Personal Access Device) doesn’t look anything like Apple’s iPad — or any kind of tablets in the market today, for that matter — it does bear a striking resemblance to Apple’s fruity iMac, which happened to also have been first introduced in 1998,” Chang reports. “So, Proview’s iPAD is an all-in-one computer that features a 15-inch (800 x 600) CRT monitor, has a processor running at 265MHz, comes with 32MB DRAM, 16GB DOM flash card for storage purpose, two USB ports, two RJ-11 jacks, Ethernet port, headphone and mic ports, two PS/2 keyboard/mouse ports, and a parallel port for connecting printers.”

Proview iPAD ( image via M.I.C. Gadget)
Proview iPAD ( image via M.I.C. Gadget)

Much more, and more photos, in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: 20,000 since 1998 is a rounding error. Apple quality control rejects that many actual iPads every month.

Related articles:
Hong Kong Judge sides with Apple over Proview – February 17, 2012
Take a look at some of Apple’s evidence in Proview iPad trademark dispute – February 16, 2012
Debt-laden Proview: China’s customs authorities unlikely to intervene in any ban of iPad exports – February 15, 2012
Apple may face iPad export ban in China trademark dispute – February 14, 2012
Proview to seek $1.5 billion from Apple in Chinese iPad trademark lawsuit – February 7, 2012
Apple appeals rejection of iPad trademark in China – January 31, 2012
Apple not allowed to call an iPad an iPad in China, court rules – December 7, 2011
Chinese court rejects Apple lawsuit over iPad trademark – December 6, 2011
iPad trademark: Proview Technology hopes to use Apple as ‘get out of debt free’ card – October 28, 2010
Chinese company claims Apple violating iPad trademark – October 27, 2010
Apple secures iPad trademark from Fujitsu – March 28, 2010


      1. And I would bet a pony to a penny, that Apple could find some infringement of Apple IP in one of those boxes.
        Normally I would say ‘On what planet are these knockoff merchants living?’ but China makes its own rules which can be applied locally, regionally or nationally on a whim.
        Expect Apple to settle at some stage to save on hassle.
        Extortion yes…but time consuming and bothersome too.

        1. I would not bet on a Settlement. They went for blood with Psystar, they don’t need to settle with anyone at any time ever, one of the benefits of having a huge cash pile. This is clearly a case they can win, I expect them to fight this all the way to the moon.

        2. Expect Apple to settle at some stage to save on hassle

          Nope! Apple know better. Once you settle with a criminal, more criminals come out of the cracks to get some of that for themselves. Think of this as a hostage situation where the hostage is a trademark. Apple need only keep this BS on the burner. The hotter it gets the more it stinks. The illegality of Proview’s claims is blatant. That’s why I am rooting for Apple to sue them back for breach of contract after this BS is over.

    1. No, the point is, far as my non-lawyer understanding goes, they own(ed) the iPad (and iPAD) name. Apple has acknowledged that the moment they have purchased the rights to that name. The contention remains now, whether Apple has successfully purchased the right in its entirety (for every zone available to Proview’s reach with iPad).

  1. What? You can all resist the charming?!?!

    On the one hand, I could view this as being a device that is so far behind the times that it invokes pity, rather than laughter. On the other, it could be cheap enough that someone of little means might actually get a “real internet PC life”.

    However, 20,000 units made is not in line with Proview having been producing these things for long. So I went to the intertubes. MDN probably already has this article up, but I had forgotten about it. Apple did acquire the European rights from Proview, but not the rights in China.

    Should be interesting.

    1. I suggest you look at the earlier article showing the documentation that Apple holds showing which countries the trademarks cover, when assigned, who dealt with the legal details, and one document quite clearly shows China, Taiwan, S.Korea, among others listed as being covered. Proview don’t have a leg to stand on, according to the documents that they signed.

      1. in other words, Proview paid off a local judge and will eventually lose this case. In the mean time Apple will sell real iPads hand over fist throughout China, pay Proview nothing, drag them through court, pay them nothing. In the end Proview will have racked up bribery and legal bills and have little or nothing to show for it. Not even the good will of people in China who love Apple.

    2. You need to read up on the case. The WSJ has some good articles on it in the last day or so, with lots of original documentation. Apple bought ALL the rights to iPad from ProView, but they essentially lied in their contracts, when they said the Taiwan subsidiary had the full unencumbered rights to the name. It turns out later that ProView made a mistake, and had registered the Chinese iPad name with the Shenzhen subsidiary. Thus, they are trying to extort Apple out of more money. The problem for them is that the contracts show that they are obligated to make good on the deal. They are trying to take their mistake, and turn it into gold, when the contracts clearly state that it’s up to ProView to correct their error.

  2. I think apple could pressure ALL subsidiaries of Proview, especially over debt concerns, and more or less go medieval on their a$$. Kind of like a drunk billionaire who buys the hotel just to fire the annoying waiter.
    I’m glad apple doesn’t behave this way but on the other hand they have to suffer annoying Proview extortion claims.

  3. Oh the Apple haters at the typical Apple Hating so called journalist clueless bloggers are loving this. Yet they never post the image that MDN has just posted. What a bunch of dorks! lol

  4. Looks like a patent infringement case for Apple. Apple should sue back claiming that Proview stole the Mac design from them. Now the deal should be, we won’t sue for your design if you don’t sue for the iPad name.

  5. it does bear a striking resemblance to Apple’s fruity iMac, which happened to also have been first introduced in 1998

    Oh, so it was yet-another iMac ripoff! Therefore, Proview already has a history of SCAMMING.

    I hope Apple is readying a lawsuit against Proview. They soooo deserve it. Over what? Breach of contract, the one where they clearly sold the iPad “Trade Mark”. Welcome to China: Criminal Nation.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.