Apple innovation and third-party apps
At MacInTouch, I came across this open letter from the makers of LiteSwitch X to Apple. As stated in the memo, it's the Sherlock 3/Watson controversy all over again.
Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?
Comments
Apple should give credit.
Apple won't give credit.
Shame. I made a Font Viewer and Apple put one in the system now. You don't see me writing anything to Apple.
Originally posted by jwill
LiteSwitch wasn't worth $15 anyway. You don't pay $15 to put up an application switcher.
I used Keyboard Maestro (and its predecessors) for years. But it bothered me that I wouldn't let me use command-tab to switch apps, supposedly because Apple reserved command-tab for its own use. When LiteSwitch X 2.0 came out and let me use command-tab, I bought it the same day. OS X's app switcher was a piece of crap until now. The $15 investment in LiteSwitch X has more than paid for itself in saved time and avoided confusion.
I'm waiting a few more weeks to get Panther with a new PowerBook. At that point I will have a choice between the improved app switcher in Panther and LiteSwitch X 2.1. Regardless of which I choose, I certainly won't regret those $15 that gave me a useful app switcher ages before we'd ever heard of Panther.
As for Apple imitating 3rd party apps, Panther's app switcher had much more precedent than LiteSwitch X, e.g. Windows. OTOH, Sherlock was an unambiguous Watson ripoff. In any case, imitation is flattery, even without credit. Sometimes you have to be satisfied with the flattery. If not, tough luck. Don't let the bitch get to you.
Escher
But, if you already bought Liteswitch, never fear! You still get the extra menus! (no sarcasm or joke implied). So if you really needed it back then, you have it now, and keep on usin it
Originally posted by Eugene
Right, Proteron shamelessly copies the Apple look-and-feel with the System Preferences icon and they have the gall to do the finger-pointing? What a snarky moron, Samuel Caughron. WTF is going on here.
That is exactly what I was thinking. The guys at Proteron have no reason to bitch...they ripped off Apples icon blatantly and now they are bitching because of a feature that was present in other operating systems and ina half-assed way in OS X until Panther came out through the dock. I admit, I use liteswitch. I bought it awhile ago. I still prefer its implementation over the current one in Panther but to each his own.
They just need to get over it.
2. Lite Switch does not only copy the icon, they also use the semi transparens bezel-look that Apple made for their sound volume and eject functionality ages ago.
They accuse Apple for near pixel copying.
a) Apple made the semi transparent bezel graphics before Proteron
b) All other graphics is the system font, and the icons from the apps.
3. They accuse Apple for "significantly improving" app switching in Panther. Apple have had alt-tab app switching in about every version om Mac OS X, and taking it to this level was just the obvious evolutionairy step. Apple have just taken the graphics out of the Dock and up to the middle of the screen. In fact, there's _NO_ added funtionality over Jaguar, just nicer representation.
4. On their web page they accuse Apple for assimilation third party software. They don't say that they assimilated functionality, but software. If that was the case, it'd be stealing, and Apple would should prepare for a law suit. Reading their letter, the wording is different, so it's obvious that Proteron is exaggeration their claims.
Proteron made GREAT apps for OS9.. What the hell happened then? Nothing! Lite switch was a free app for OS9, but now it costs 15 dollars? When we already have that funcionality built in the OS they start to charge for some added, in my oppinion meaningless, functionality? My advice to Proteron is: Stop bitching and start your innovative process again.
LiteSwitch Classic:
But that's what I thought about Watson/Sherlock too, and that guy seems to have a real chip on his shoulder, despite Apple offering him a job.
Yes, GoMac was actually far improved from the Windows taskbar in many ways, but not different so much that Microsoft couldn't have sued Proteron over. (Although ironically Microsoft set the precedent for not being able to sue others for stealing look and feel, when Apple lost the suit against Microsoft).
Oh and remember Proteron's home page for about 3 years? The one nearly identical to Microsoft's?
Right.
I was initially torn thinking "Hm, yeah Apple pretty much did just yoink the same specs from LiteSwitch" but in actuality it's all Apple's to play around with to begin with. You want unique? Then make it unique, don't mix and match from industry standard conventions and pre-existing components that Apple has made for you.
Watson is $30. Not the most expensive but it isn't cheap. Consolidation is going to happen in this industry. The OS is being asked to do more and more and as a Developer you need to make sure your IP is protected by Law. Protern is laying claim to an UI feature that existed for over a freakin decade. Ummmm no ...Apple shouldn't compensate you.
Originally posted by foad
I admit, I use liteswitch. I bought it awhile ago. I still prefer its implementation over the current one in Panther but to each his own.
I'm glad to hear that I wouldn't be the first one to stick with LiteSwitch even though Panther's app switcher is much improved.
Originally posted by Henriok
In fact, there's _NO_ added funtionality over Jaguar, just nicer representation.
"Nicer representation" is the added functionality.
Escher
Originally posted by Escher
Representation needs to be in your face, highly visible, in the middle of the screen. That way your eyes don't have to move when you switch apps.
wow. i thought i was lazy, but wow. "your eyes don't have to move" wow. wow.
Originally posted by hmurchison
...as a Developer you need to make sure your IP is protected by Law.
with this, I very much disagree. IP laws are very harmful when it comes to software. for example: without IP laws we got the world wide web, and but for the illegal actions of a monolith, we would have had a lively competition between browsers promoting feature sets. with IP, we get can lose things like web plugins. what if someone patent'd app switching, or <modifier>-tab? we wouldn't have apple's dock, or liteswitch. IP laws hurt software.
if you can't handle competition: (a) move to cuba, or (b) create a product that is better than the competition.