or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google backs HTC in what could be 'long and bloody battle' with Apple
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google backs HTC in what could be 'long and bloody battle' with Apple - Page 6

post #201 of 285
I believe Nokia's suit is over the use of GSM technology. Apparently it's licensed out to other companies that pay for it's use, and they're claiming Apple used the technology without paying fees to Nokia.

I guess Nokia waited because they didn't think Apple would be a rising player in the phone industry until it was too late.
lmao internet
Reply
lmao internet
Reply
post #202 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymous guy View Post

The problem is - Bing is still a distant second in terms of usability and results (probably a much farther 2nd in terms of user adaptation). If the Bing all in one app is any indication of MS search services taking over the iPhone, the consumers will have much to lose.

True, but such decisions are not always made in the best end users interest.

We could argue that majority of Windows users would prefer syncing their iPhones with more or less anything but iTunes for Windows. Even if we need to keep iTunes for purchasing music and apps on-line, many would rather do daily syncing from WMP, small resident sync tool (like Palm was using) or even use simple drag & drop for transferring music, documents, images...

...not going to happen, because all those options wouldn't work for Apple. Likewise, if they decide going MS way would be better strategy for them (and would not create much damage - now that is a million dollar question), I can see them - any corporation, basically - doing it in a heartbeat.
post #203 of 285
Apple is just using HTC as a proxy to get Google. They won't sue Google directly because:

1)Google has the cash reserves to defend themselves for years in court. HTC is a handset maker, where the profit margins are razor thin. HTC does not charge customers a 100% premium like Apple does. 2) Google has their own impressive set of IP, a number of which is utilized by Apple and the iPhone. Removing all the Google applications, IP, and tools from the iPhone would restrict it even more. 3) Google would fight back hard if Apple filed suit against them and, as I said, they have the resources to defend themselves.


Corporate stiff-arm tactics at their finest (or worst).
post #204 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrike View Post

Ugh, I hate it when people use this as an example. Note that Apple's granted patents don't include anything shown in that video. Nothing. There is only one thing in that video that it shares in common with the iPhone: speed. The multitouch, shadow tracking technology wasn't it. People were amazed by the speed of UI. He probably had a nice x86 machine with a nice CPU. Apple did it with hardware 10x less powerful on a 3.5 inch screen using a totally different multi-touch technology and shipped it for millions of people to use.

Moreover, it cheapens the work that Apple did. Apple was doing it concurrently to when Jeff Han was doing it, was limited to mobile CPUs and GPUS, and designed and built an actual real live product. It took real-hard, innovative work to do it. They had to design upteen UIs (Jeff Han did zero). They had to master the integrated work to actually get the iPhone to display as fast as it did. That's basically as difficult as it gets in project engineering. UI objects move in the iPhone UI as if they are stuck to your finger. On mobile hardware! That's a tremendous integration of screen technology, algorithm/software design, software optimizations, CPU/GPU choices, battery optimizations. The virtual keyboard design, the whole thing with its speed, dynamic hit targeting, and word correction is still unmatched. The dynamic hit targeting for UI buttons is still unmatched. If Apple didn't get the keyboard right, I bet you the iPhone wouldn't have taken off and the state-of-the-art cell phone design would be the QWERTY candy bar or slider.

Han's work has its applications, mostly in presentation style environments. They are not similar to iPhone at all. If it was so innovative, why doesn't HTC, Palm etc use screens with light projection and shadow tracking for their multitouch technology? They should invest in miniaturizing the technology. Even something like the horizontal swipe. The T-Mobile G1 used a 9 point grid with a user defined swipe pattern about those points to unlock the screen. That was interesting. In the Nexus 1, the unlock screen is basically a simple horizontal swipe, but slightly curved. Um, basically like the iPhone. Did Google/HTC really have to do that? They could have, say, used a vertical swipe? 2 fingers? A button? Buttons? Hardware based buttons? Kept the G1 style unlock design?

Thank you for that explanation, it was very informative.

So when it comes to other products having multitouch, did they all just reverse engineer what Apple did?
post #205 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrike View Post

Ugh, I hate it when people use this as an example. Note that Apple's granted patents don't include anything shown in that video. Nothing. There is only one thing in that video that it shares in common with the iPhone: speed. The multitouch, shadow tracking technology wasn't it. People were amazed by the speed of UI. He probably had a nice x86 machine with a nice CPU. Apple did it with hardware 10x less powerful on a 3.5 inch screen using a totally different multi-touch technology and shipped it for millions of people to use.

Moreover, it cheapens the work that Apple did. Apple was doing it concurrently to when Jeff Han was doing it, was limited to mobile CPUs and GPUS, and designed and built an actual real live product. It took real-hard, innovative work to do it. They had to design upteen UIs (Jeff Han did zero). They had to master the integrated work to actually get the iPhone to display as fast as it did. That's basically as difficult as it gets in project engineering. UI objects move in the iPhone UI as if they are stuck to your finger. On mobile hardware! That's a tremendous integration of screen technology, algorithm/software design, software optimizations, CPU/GPU choices, battery optimizations. The virtual keyboard design, the whole thing with its speed, dynamic hit targeting, and word correction is still unmatched. The dynamic hit targeting for UI buttons is still unmatched. If Apple didn't get the keyboard right, I bet you the iPhone wouldn't have taken off and the state-of-the-art cell phone design would be the QWERTY candy bar or slider.

Han's work has its applications, mostly in presentation style environments. They are not similar to iPhone at all. If it was so innovative, why doesn't HTC, Palm etc use screens with light projection and shadow tracking for their multitouch technology? They should invest in miniaturizing the technology. Even something like the horizontal swipe. The T-Mobile G1 used a 9 point grid with a user defined swipe pattern about those points to unlock the screen. That was interesting. In the Nexus 1, the unlock screen is basically a simple horizontal swipe, but slightly curved. Um, basically like the iPhone. Did Google/HTC really have to do that? They could have, say, used a vertical swipe? 2 fingers? A button? Buttons? Hardware based buttons? Kept the G1 style unlock design?

Brilliant post. Says all that needs to be said.
post #206 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Brilliant post. Says all that needs to be said.

Its going to be very interesting to see how this all plays out. I wouldn't surprise me in the least to learn that Google/HTC is infringing on Apple patents, anymore than it would surprise me to see that Apple is infringing on Nokia patents as so on...This is why a lot of people think patent law is inherently flawed.

In the end I would think there must be more than one way to do multi-touch anyhow. So win or lose I don't think anyone is going to permanently win or lose. Neither Google or HTC is going to die from this and Apple isn't always going to have the only multi-touch phone either. This strikes me as standard business procedure really and an attempt to maintain market share. Not that I blame Apple for that. This is exactly what they should be doing.

That being said, I kind of hope the patent system is changed to allow for more competition without litigation. Admittedly however, I don't know enough about that system to understand what would work better.
post #207 of 285
It could be because Google isn't a hardware manufacturer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tipoo View Post

Apple is just using HTC as a proxy to get Google. They won't sue Google directly because:

1)Google has the cash reserves to defend themselves for years in court. HTC is a handset maker, where the profit margins are razor thin. HTC does not charge customers a 100% premium like Apple does. 2) Google has their own impressive set of IP, a number of which is utilized by Apple and the iPhone. Removing all the Google applications, IP, and tools from the iPhone would restrict it even more. 3) Google would fight back hard if Apple filed suit against them and, as I said, they have the resources to defend themselves.


Corporate stiff-arm tactics at their finest (or worst).
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #208 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStud View Post

Search.

Why don't you google it?

post #209 of 285
We can now add HTC to the list of those we hate, right after Adobe, who is lazy, and Google, who is trying to kill us. Oh. And Intuit. And Microsoft, of course.

Am I forgetting anybody?
post #210 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by trboyden View Post

Kind of like Apple's push to control all things media?

incorrect. they want to control all things within the ecosystems they create. i have no problem with that.
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #211 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post

For anyone to criticize Apple, Nokia or any company or individual for protecting their creations or inventions -- as evidenced by copyrights, trademarks of patents -- may be indicative of a person who is either ignorant of the law, or just plain grandstander.

no-one like that around here!
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #212 of 285
post #213 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

Daniel Eran Dilger's take

And after a lot of simply opinions and no facts I stopped reading that crap here:

Quote:
(because Microsoft has bet all of its marbles on a plan that sacrifices todays WiMo to resurrect it as WP7 in a make-or-break effort that is modeled to look as close to the iPhone as possible).

Is Microsoft or Google paying Eran? Because I don't know no one which can make so bad publicity for Apple that him.
post #214 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymous guy View Post

I believe Nokia's suit is over the use of GSM technology. Apparently it's licensed out to other companies that pay for it's use, and they're claiming Apple used the technology without paying fees to Nokia.

I guess Nokia waited because they didn't think Apple would be a rising player in the phone industry until it was too late.

Both Nokia and Apple has said that they were in negotiations since 2.007
post #215 of 285
From the wording of Apple's claim, they truly believe they are the injured party. The wording of their claim - those are the words of someone who is truly aggrieved. Apple isn't scared, they're monumentally offended. This isn't some bogus attempt to stifle innovation via patent suits. Apple is, however, reaching very, very far with the suit.

It isn't that Apple is using the system to attack competitors out of fear or as a way to "cheat", but they're looking to make competitors pay very, very dearly for the injuries Apple believes they've caused. Some think, too dearly. This of course depends on the belief that Apple's motivations are genuine and they truly believe that something has been taken from them unjustly, motivations which I believe to be true. Whether something *has* been taken from Apple unjustly is for the courts to decide.
post #216 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

From the wording of Apple's claim, they truly believe they are the injured party. The wording of their claim - those are the words of someone who is truly aggrieved. Apple isn't scared, they're monumentally offended. This isn't some bogus attempt to stifle innovation via patent suits. Apple is, however, reaching very, very far with the suit.

It isn't that Apple is using the system to attack competitors out of fear or as a way to "cheat", but they're looking to make competitors pay very, very dearly for the injuries Apple believes they've caused. Some think, too dearly. This of course depends on the belief that Apple's motivations are genuine and they truly believe that something has been taken from them unjustly, motivations which I believe to be true. Whether something *has* been taken from Apple unjustly is for the courts to decide.

Is this interpretation from John Gruber or did you independently come up with it?

It's going to be a little bit of all of the above, including strategic business moves. To actually bring up the suit, one has to be offended, scared, slighted, betrayed, cheated, etc. It's just natural. But don't discount strategic direction. Jobs knows just like the next guy that this is a race to the bottom and that Google is leading the way by offering "free" as the price of entry for mobile OS development. Anybody in the mobile software business should know that they have to blunt Android as much as possible or they are going to be out of business.

I think everyone wants fiefdoms to spur on competition. Google/Android is spurring on mono-culture by creating something just good enough and giving it away to spur on usage of Google advertising. Maybe Apple wants to put a stop to that now.

Considering that, an alliance with Microsoft on Bing or Yahoo would be the way to go instead of a lawsuit, but who knows.
post #217 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

We can now add HTC to the list of those we hate, right after Adobe, who is lazy, and Google, who is trying to kill us. Oh. And Intuit. And Microsoft, of course.

Am I forgetting anybody?

LOL! They're all thinking it, you're just saying it ;P
post #218 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

We can now add HTC to the list of those we hate, right after Adobe, who is lazy, and Google, who is trying to kill us. Oh. And Intuit. And Microsoft, of course.

Am I forgetting anybody?

Nokia and Amazon
post #219 of 285
And Kodak.
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #220 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

And after a lot of simply opinions and no facts I stopped reading that crap here:

To each his own, I thought he made some great points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

Is Microsoft or Google paying Eran? Because I don't know no one which can make so bad publicity for Apple that him.

While I have no doubt that Microsoft has journalists and bloggers on its payroll, I highly doubt if Daniel is one of them.
post #221 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

While I have no doubt that Microsoft has journalists and bloggers on its payroll, I highly doubt if Daniel is one of them.


My rhetorical question was ironic

As I also think that companies have paid "advertisers" I also highly doubt that MS pay Eran, as I totally convinced that Apple doesn't and won't pay someone like him
post #222 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by trboyden View Post

The iPhone came out with a phone with an icon-based application manager interface. Blackberry had such an interface well before Apple on a cell phone and I'm sure others before them. There is nothing revolutionary about that at all, just fancier graphics in the case of Apple's implementation. Icon-based application launchers are as old as the first GUI-based operating systems (i.e. Xerox, who Apple first stole the technology from). Added to that is multi-touch, again only "revolutionary" as far as it's use in a consumer handset. Elan and Synaptics invented multi-touch and have used it in commercial applications and resold the technology to just about every technology OEM out there.

The only feature Apple could possibly have a case on is the App Store integration. Apple will make a big deal about this in the press creating FUD to disrupt the commercial success of their competitors and will then sign a licensing deal to settle the manner. This is nothing but pure anti-competitive actions by a hypocritical company that has stolen more than their fair share of technology from others.

Apple, sign a cross-licensing deal and get back to proving that you have the best technology by innovating and not by being a patent troll.

Lord, I get tired of this style of selective analysis.

We can always, and I mean always claim that a given product isn't "innovative" or "new" if we're willing to play fast and loose with categories.

By constantly changing the focus from general to specific and back, you can explain away every invention in the history of man. There will always have been antecedents, similar things, examples from other categories, etc. You end up making an argument against all patent and copywrite law.

So the iPhone is merely about an "icon based application launcher." If that doesn't work, you could point out that touch screens already existed, or phones, or hand held objects. I don't know why you even bother to exempt the App Store from this leveling impulse, since it's easy enough to claim that online app purchasing already existed, and implementing that for a handset is just a trivial variant.

Here's a little test: name something you think is a genuinely innovative new thing. Something that you think ought to be patentable. I guarantee you I can use exactly the language that gets used to dismiss Apple's work to show how that thing is, in fact, not innovative or new at all.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #223 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

I've just read that Apple is actually looking for an injunction against all the named phones in their lawsuit. Which means a block on importing, marketing, advertising, demonstrating, warehousing inventory for distribution, distributing, or offering for sale.

Now if Apple wasn't "threatened" as you say, then couldn't they have just simply stopped at the lawsuit itself (essentially asking HTC to just pay)? Asking the court to literally stop all of those phones from crossing our borders and to remove all existing phones in our borders seems really excessive.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple also asks the court to force HTC to have any and all infringing items be removed from existing HTC smartphones not mentioned in the suit via a OTA update.

It does give off the feeling that Apple is threatened... This move would not just slow smartphone competition (as it would if Apple is simply successful on the lawsuit alone), it would outright kill competition in the US market, as most of those phones are the main competitors to Apple.

No, then you don't look like you really mean it. You always ask for the harshest possible outcome in the filing to allow negotiated settlement room later.

This lawsuit is really about Android, not HTC itself. Because if HTC is found to be in conflict with Apples patents, by extension that means the Android distro they used was the source of much of that conflict. The whole Android code tree suddenly becomes potential legal poison and anyone using it becomes vulnerable due to precedent. This is a Home Run swinging case it is...

I give Apple pretty good odds too, They can look inside ALL the Android code to see specific implementation methods without having to ask anyone for permission, but the Android crowd, including HTC can't look inside OS X iPhone without a subpoena, and cant use any of that looking as a means to avoid infringement later.

I would be very surprised if Apple engineers haven't been assigned to the legal team dissecting Android for several months already and the filing is based on what they all think are slam dunk winnable issues. Because of the openness of Android, this case will be far more cut and dried than most patent cases where both sides are really just guessing until the judge lets them peek inside each others code. The kicker will be whether or not the Android devs were very careful in documenting the existing art they derived their code from. If they were Android can survive nicely, if not...
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #224 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by trboyden View Post

Actually, it's not. It shows a lack of knowledge of how the open source community works.

Open source programmers could care less about patents. If a legal case determines that a feature they developed is infringing, they just modify it and move on. Apple's huffing and puffing will do nothing to slow to progress of open source development. In fact it might actually back-fire as several open source licenses have provisions that will revoke the right to use "any" open source software if a user of said software brings a patent suit against another open source project. It is a M.A.D. clause to prevent heavy users of open source (such as Apple) from abusing their software patents.

Yes, but Apple isn't suing the Android project over patents, Apple is just suing another company which is shipping a product they believe is using their patents. It is an indirect shot at Android that essentially says hobbyists can use the open source project all they want and we won't interfere, but if you want to make money off our patented ideas, do it another way.

Commercially it may have a significant impact on Android as the Android team will need to address any ruled infringements before a company can ship it in a paying product again. But it isn't an attack on Android itself which would trigger poison pills.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #225 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by theobold View Post

Sue H.T.C. but not sue Palm?

Apple already knew Palm was going down. Why sue when you can gloat all the way to the bank?
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #226 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

No, then you don't look like you really mean it. You always ask for the harshest possible outcome in the filing to allow negotiated settlement room later.

This lawsuit is really about Android, not HTC itself. Because if HTC is found to be in conflict with Apples patents, by extension that means the Android distro they used was the source of much of that conflict. The whole Android code tree suddenly becomes potential legal poison and anyone using it becomes vulnerable due to precedent. This is a Home Run swinging case it is...

I give Apple pretty good odds too, They can look inside ALL the Android code to see specific implementation methods without having to ask anyone for permission, but the Android crowd, including HTC can't look inside OS X iPhone without a subpoena, and cant use any of that looking as a means to avoid infringement later.

I would be very surprised if Apple engineers haven't been assigned to the legal team dissecting Android for several months already and the filing is based on what they all think are slam dunk winnable issues. Because of the openness of Android, this case will be far more cut and dried than most patent cases where both sides are really just guessing until the judge lets them peek inside each others code. The kicker will be whether or not the Android devs were very careful in documenting the existing art they derived their code from. If they were Android can survive nicely, if not...

Another user has already pointed out the whole "ask for the harshest, settle later" mentality. Part overreaction on my part, as it'll probably never get to that point. But if it does and Apple uses it as precedence against the rest of its competition, it quickly becomes an issue of antitrust.

I don't think it'll be as cut and dry and you make it seem to be. There's no way Apple can leave Google out of this mess (as you said, it's about Android) and when Google eventually (if they haven't already lent legal support to HTC) get in on it, they will counter-sue with a battery of their own patents. Some of which I'm sure will end up being critical pillars for the iPhone. In the end, they won't be able to take out Android without taking their own iPhone out in the process and that's a lose-lose for everyone. Not to mention that MS is also sitting on the sidelines watching too. Apple has to be careful not to end up going against a Google/HTC/MS team.

When it comes to these patent-type lawsuits, it's not about "winning" for the defense, as much as it is about creating a situation where if the plantiff wins, they also lose. The main reason why the vast majority of these cases end up getting settled in some way.

Then there's the whole mess with Nokia. What if some of the patents Apple is calling out is also in dispute over there and Nokia wins on those?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

Apple already knew Palm was going down. Why sue when you can gloat all the way to the bank?

Actually, I think it's less about money and more about the fact that Palm bought Handspring, which holds some of the original, founding patents (if you will) for smartphone devices. There is a very deep portfolio of patents Palm can use as leverage against Apple in a heartbeat if Apple goes after them.
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #227 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

Another user has already pointed out the whole "ask for the harshest, settle later" mentality. Part overreaction on my part, as it'll probably never get to that point. But if it does and Apple uses it as precedence against the rest of its competition, it quickly becomes an issue of antitrust.

It can only be anti-trust if Apple is deemed to be a monopoly in the product space. By most manufactures own press Apple is still a minority player, effectively cutting anti-trust off at the knees for at least several more years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

I don't think it'll be as cut and dry and you make it seem to be. There's no way Apple can leave Google out of this mess (as you said, it's about Android) and when Google eventually (if they haven't already lent legal support to HTC) get in on it, they will counter-sue with a battery of their own patents. Some of which I'm sure will end up being critical pillars for the iPhone. In the end, they won't be able to take out Android without taking their own iPhone out in the process and that's a lose-lose for everyone. Not to mention that MS is also sitting on the sidelines watching too. Apple has to be careful not to end up going against a Google/HTC/MS team.

I disagree. HTC needs Google to step in and support them, Apple only needs to show HTC is shipping something that violates the patent. As far as Apple and the courts would be concerned, what happens between HTC and Google happens to be HTC-Google business and outside the scope of the lawsuit. This is a good old by-proxy battle and Apple doesn't need to kill Android, just make it not as likeable as iPhone OS in the consumers eyes. A couple years delay in development and/or Android ending up with a crummy UI is far better for Apple than an outright kill. That might hasten a monopoly era where Apple would need to be more careful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

When it comes to these patent-type lawsuits, it's not about "winning" for the defense, as much as it is about creating a situation where if the plantiff wins, they also lose. The main reason why the vast majority of these cases end up getting settled in some way.

Always true. But Apple got to look inside Android BEFORE they filed, which gives them tactical and strategic initiative in the lawsuit. That drastically reduces the chances of losing by winning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

Then there's the whole mess with Nokia. What if some of the patents Apple is calling out is also in dispute over there and Nokia wins on those?

Completely different patents. Nokia is suing on GSM radio work. Apple even admits they are using those patents and that they have offered to pay the fair standard rate for the patent licenses, but Nokia wants more in violation of various standards bodies rules for charging such rates. That suit will get settled down the road and Apple already knows it will pay, Apple just doesn't want to pay more than it should according to the standards organization membership guidelines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

Actually, I think it's less about money and more about the fact that Palm bought Handspring, which holds some of the original, founding patents (if you will) for smartphone devices. There is a very deep portfolio of patents Palm can use as leverage against Apple in a heartbeat if Apple goes after them.

Stack-em up against Newton patents. That will probably end up a wash and Palm doesn't have the cash to play that kind of game anymore.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #228 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

Another user has already pointed out the whole "ask for the harshest, settle later" mentality. Part overreaction on my part, as it'll probably never get to that point. But if it does and Apple uses it as precedence against the rest of its competition, it quickly becomes an issue of antitrust.

I don't think it'll be as cut and dry and you make it seem to be. There's no way Apple can leave Google out of this mess (as you said, it's about Android) and when Google eventually (if they haven't already lent legal support to HTC) get in on it, they will counter-sue with a battery of their own patents. Some of which I'm sure will end up being critical pillars for the iPhone. In the end, they won't be able to take out Android without taking their own iPhone out in the process and that's a lose-lose for everyone. Not to mention that MS is also sitting on the sidelines watching too. Apple has to be careful not to end up going against a Google/HTC/MS team.

When it comes to these patent-type lawsuits, it's not about "winning" for the defense, as much as it is about creating a situation where if the plantiff wins, they also lose. The main reason why the vast majority of these cases end up getting settled in some way.

Then there's the whole mess with Nokia. What if some of the patents Apple is calling out is also in dispute over there and Nokia wins on those?



Actually, I think it's less about money and more about the fact that Palm bought Handspring, which holds some of the original, founding patents (if you will) for smartphone devices. There is a very deep portfolio of patents Palm can use as leverage against Apple in a heartbeat if Apple goes after them.

I guess it's fun to indulge in a lot of slippery slope theorizing, but it doesn't really amount to much, does it?

I mean, what if Apple sues everybody in an effort to halt all progress of everything? What if everyone countersues Apple and they're litigated out of business? What if consumers everywhere are horrified by Apple's aggression and turn to Android en masse to demonstrate their solidarity with open source? What if Ubuntu therefore gets a huge boost, and Linux becomes the dominate desktop OS? What if Steve Jobs has gone mad with power and personally guns down Eric Schmidt?

All alarming scenarios, to be sure, but maybe would should wait and see how some of this plays out before getting to heavily into doomsday speculation.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #229 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I guess it's fun to indulge in a lot of slippery slope theorizing, but it doesn't really amount to much, does it?

I mean, what if Apple sues everybody in an effort to halt all progress of everything? What if everyone countersues Apple and they're litigated out of business? What if consumers everywhere are horrified by Apple's aggression and turn to Android en masse to demonstrate their solidarity with open source? What if Ubuntu therefore gets a huge boost, and Linux becomes the dominate desktop OS? What if Steve Jobs has gone mad with power and personally guns down Eric Schmidt?

All alarming scenarios, to be sure, but maybe would should wait and see how some of this plays out before getting to heavily into doomsday speculation.

Agree in that this is all wild speculation at this point. Like I said, part overreaction from me, but you still can't help but make these predictions.

But I'm still going to stick to the outcome where Google/HTC and Apple end up in sue/counter-sue and settle this, all without us consumers feeling a thing. Unless, of course, Steve Jobs has gone mad with power...
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #230 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

Agree in that this is all wild speculation at this point. Like I said, part overreaction from me, but you still can't help but make these predictions.

But I'm still going to stick to the outcome where Google/HTC and Apple end up in sue/counter-sue and settle this, all without us consumers feeling a thing. Unless, of course, Steve Jobs has gone mad with power...

Just for the record, I think Apple's suit here may be overreaching.

However, I'm tending to agree with one theory that's going around, which is that Apple is doing this, not because they're "afraid" of Android, but because Jobs is personally aggrieved. That he feels that it is an injustice that Android is enjoying some success in the market by building on the iPhone revolution (if you doubt that that's what happened, take a look at the pics of the Android prototype that was circulating, from before Google had time to digest the iPhone upheaval-- it looks like every other smart phone on the market, pre-iPhone).
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #231 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Just for the record, I think Apple's suit here may be overreaching.

However, I'm tending to agree with one theory that's going around, which is that Apple is doing this, not because they're "afraid" of Android, but because Jobs is personally aggrieved. That he feels that it is an injustice that Android is enjoying some success in the market by building on the iPhone revolution (if you doubt that that's what happened, take a look at the pics of the Android prototype that was circulating, from before Google had time to digest the iPhone upheaval-- it looks like every other smart phone on the market, pre-iPhone).

Every other smartphone on the market pre-iphone? There was a lot of different formats of smartphones out there. You just have to look at HTC models and you will see which smartphone the G1 comes from
post #232 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Just for the record, I think Apple's suit here may be overreaching.

However, I'm tending to agree with one theory that's going around, which is that Apple is doing this, not because they're "afraid" of Android, but because Jobs is personally aggrieved. That he feels that it is an injustice that Android is enjoying some success in the market by building on the iPhone revolution (if you doubt that that's what happened, take a look at the pics of the Android prototype that was circulating, from before Google had time to digest the iPhone upheaval-- it looks like every other smart phone on the market, pre-iPhone).


LOL. Injustice? Please. I understand that many people adore him but really...there's no harm in telling the truth. There's absolutely nothing wrong with saying it the way it should be said. Judging from his recent statements, it seems to be he's more so "indignant," "insecure," and "pissed off."

And you know what? He has a right to be. In fact, if he weren't worried about potential revenue declines in app and iPhone sales, I would say he's a complete idiot. Let's look at the recent numbers.

Article 1

Article 2


Like it or not, especially in this recession, the market for smartphones and software apps is a zero sum game. Apple in this lawsuit is simply doing what any corporation would do, which is preserve its share value. Nothing more.

Whether or not other Android phones look similar has absolutely no bearing on this case. If it did, car companies would have the right to patent exterior styling designs and cues and sue each other even though style "borrowing" takes place on a massive scale.


Injustice? Oh, my. I didn't realize that the vocabulary often utilized by liberal arts professors was relevant to a proxy war between two software giants!
post #233 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

Agree in that this is all wild speculation at this point. Like I said, part overreaction from me, but you still can't help but make these predictions.

But I'm still going to stick to the outcome where Google/HTC and Apple end up in sue/counter-sue and settle this, all without us consumers feeling a thing. Unless, of course, Steve Jobs has gone mad with power...



For better or worse, this lawsuit could drag on on for years. It all boils down to:

1. International Trade Commission ruling. They don't render punitive damages or monetary redress. From what's been said in the news, it's either injunction or no injunction against all HTC phones that violate the patents.

2. Whether Apple in a more than 50-50 chance of prevailing in this lawsuit agrees to let HTC sell its phones under a cross-licensing agreement.
post #234 of 285
Trial has been put on hold until ITC investigation finishes. 15 months moreless?

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/04/a...tc-investigat/
post #235 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

Trial has been put on hold until ITC investigation finishes. 15 months moreless?

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/04/a...tc-investigat/

That's for Apple vs. Nokia.
post #236 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

That's for Apple vs. Nokia.

Yes, thanks, I missed to write which trial I was refering. I was wondering if the Apple/HTC would be the same
post #237 of 285
I think its bad publicity for apple and good for HTC. The lawsuit, in consumers eyes, puts HTC on the same level with apple, which is great for HTC: "If apple is suing HTC then HTC must be making something as good as an iPhone"

Just my opinion...
post #238 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrike View Post


But the idea that Palm could out-duel Apple in a patent war is juvenile, as are 90% of the commentary out there regarding patent validity and who is right or wrong. You don't think Apple doesn't have patents that'll counter Palm's patents? Really? You think Google would survive unscathed? You do as you said it, but it's highly doubtful. It's going to be a mess.


That's my point. If Apple's playing big, it's feasible that a response will be a big play by Google (like buying and using Palm) or maybe even somebody else getting into the fray (say Microsoft or Motorola or some consortium of manufacturers). Like I said, if you were google why would you not buy Palm to use as cannon fodder to dent Apple? Of course Apple has patents that could dent Palm, but would Google really care how much damage is done to Palm? Or would they care about how much Palm's IP could do to Apple?

It's a fantastical scenario. But once you start getting into patent shooting war, anything's possible....and companies like Palm, with lots of IP, suddenly become very, very valuable.
post #239 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

Is Microsoft or Google paying Eran? Because I don't know no one which can make so bad publicity for Apple that him.

I got the impression long ago that he was being paid by the word.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #240 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

Every other smartphone on the market pre-iphone? There was a lot of different formats of smartphones out there. You just have to look at HTC models and you will see which smartphone the G1 comes from

Which ones? Because it appears to me that every HTC smartphone prior to the iPhone were variants on the keypad and small screen format.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google backs HTC in what could be 'long and bloody battle' with Apple