or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Michael Scrip

Warner is making money... but the services that stream their songs, like Spotify, are not. Articles like these make me wonder what the future holds for streaming music in general: "Spotify financial results show struggle to make streaming music profitable - Its 15m paying subscribers helped Spotify to more than €1bn of revenues in 2014, but its losses are still growing faster than its income" Even if Spotify adds more paying customers... they will end up paying even...
...and who is ultimately hired for a voiceover job for a South Korean electronics company.
I've been using an iPad without a stylus for years. Apple designed it to work that way... agree?Now... if Apple added a stylus for drawing... that would be an extra feature... not an essential method of input.In contrast... Windows Tablet Edition pretty much required a stylus to do any sort of screen-input. And those were the tablets Steve was referring to.
Steve Jobs meant that you didn't NEED a stylus to operate the iPhone. It was designed to work with your finger as the primary input method.In contrast... other smartphones of the day depended heavily on the stylus. Just look at those tiny icons and menus:If Apple offered a stylus for the iPad Pro it would be for specific tasks like drawing... not for the primary operation of the iPad Pro.You could theoretically use the iPad Pro and never touch a stylus.But good luck using...
Apple uses a British guy for their voiceovers. But he's actually Jony Ive, Apple's Senior VP of Design, and he happens to be British. I wonder if Samsung's production company had a selection of voiceover actors with different accents to choose from. Seems like an odd coincidence that they're both using British guys... dontcha think? Well... it's not so weird for Apple... since they have a British guy working for them. But Samsung? .
It's the "Raid-1" of Presidential aircraft
You're right... most people have never seen the Jony Ive presentation videos. But Apple's success isn't from those videos.It's that Apple makes great products and lots of people buy them. (and they happen to carry high margins)So if Samsung (or Nokia, Motorola, anyone) thinks they can be successful by creating "Apple-style" videos... good luck.That is NOT the solution to their problems.
How is it wrong?I pulled this line directly from the USPTO website:"A patent cannot be obtained upon a mere idea or suggestion."From here: http://www.uspto.gov/patents-getting-started/general-information-concerning-patents#heading-4So how can you patent the "idea" of a car?For a patent to even be considered... it needs to be a new invention, or a new and useful process, or a new composition of matter, or a new and useful improvement to something.You can't walk into the...
My point was idea vs invention. One of those you cannot patent... the other you can.The earlier comment was saying that some phones already have two cameras... so Apple shouldn't be granted a patent.But he didn't dig in to see what the patent application is actually saying. Yes... someone else has already put two cameras in a phone... and created an image using two cameras in a phone... but Apple's method could be very different.That's why they have to describe the...
This Apple patent application isn't simply "two cameras in a mobile phone"It's 44 pages and 18,000 words describing... in great detail... a specific implementation of two cameras in a mobile phone.You cannot patent an idea. You can only patent the method of creating a particular real-world product.From the USPTO:"A patent cannot be obtained upon a mere idea or suggestion. The patent is granted upon the new machine, manufacture, etc... and not upon the idea or suggestion of...
New Posts  All Forums: