or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple asks for US preliminary injunction of Samsung's Android 4.0 Galaxy Nexus
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple asks for US preliminary injunction of Samsung's Android 4.0 Galaxy Nexus - Page 9

post #321 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

Of course they will. The one after Apple forces them to remove several features. I wonder how they'll word the update when they tell users certain features have been "disabled".


Funny, I don't remember many Apple fans talking about the demise of Android. I have, however, heard countless Android fans always talking about the number of Android devices activated per day and how Android growth will soon result in the death of the "closed" iOS. Or the next iPad killer that'll knock the iPad out of the market. In fact, I've been hearing these for years. After the Galaxy Tab, ASUS Transformer, Playbook, TouchPad, Transformer Prime.....which one is next?

Which Apple IP was stolen from other companies? I'd really like to see your "list" of said thefts. And where are the lawsuits from these companies? If Apple has stolen as much as you imply then there must be someone out there, after seeing Apple's huge profits, that figures they should get a piece of the pie. Or at least a few quick $$$ from Apple to have them "go away".

Jobs himself admitted to using existing ideas and refining them. Apple does a lot of integrating and enhancing- moreso than inventing IMO. There is plenty of this outlined in the biography. Apple succeeded in patenting old refined ideas but we are just starting to see the lawsuit domino effect. Who will come out ahead i cant predict but i suspect with enough nest kicking Apple will surely get painfully stung
post #322 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Here we go again.

Android reigns supreme with the future release of a tablet that has just one supposedly better feature.

Haven't we been through all of this with the Xoom, the Touchpad, and the Tab?

Why don't we wait for a few reviews and see how many they sell before we accuse anybody of beating anybody 'to the punch'.

Hell, why don't we wait until we all actually see one.

Don't be silly they are out there now in the 720p variety. I messed with it at CES, certainly the smoothest looking Android tablet to date, but I still wouldn't touch one. Nvidia's quad (sudo penta) core Tegra 3 platform is quite an impressive design. However it's still based on Cortex A9. The successor due by the fall is based on A15 and 'supposedly' up to 10x more horsepower than the current crappy crop of Tegra 2 tablets.

Here's to hoping Apple really moves the goal posts with A6.
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #323 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I think it's amazing how the Fandroids can praise Android to high heavens - but apparently can't use Google Search.

You've gotten the wrong dates. Here's the history:

Apple's first attempt was iTools - released in 2000. (Note: I'm not claiming that this is the first time that any OS sync'd to the cloud. IIRC, there were third party solutions before that).

Dot Mac replaced iTools in 2002

Mobile Me replaced dot Mac in 2008

And iCloud replaced Mobile Me in 2011.

So iTools was at least 8 years ahead of Android - and long before Android even existed.



And you've obviously never had any intellectual property worth defending.

Apple has billions of dollars invested in their IP and has every right to defend it. And their court victories indicate that their defense is justified. They haven't won every battle, but it would be surprising if they did. But they've won enough that the courts clearly think that their arguments are at least plausible.

Your final sentence is absurd. How much damage would it do to Apple's business if they simply let people copy everything they did without making an effort to stop them? They would undoubtedly lose many billions of dollars of business. Not only would it be foolish not to attempt to protect their property, but it would probably be a violation of their fiduciary responsibilities.

Give it a break. The only people convinced Apple's IP is being stolen (and that its legitimately their IP) is the lovely followers here, Apple and the courts they convince with money and incompetent opposing defense lawyers (ie samsung lawyers who cant differentiate aspect ratios)
post #324 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicnreason View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffdm View Post

ai's penalties are based on infractions, most are 1 point each, and he has a list of infractions. I think it's 5 points for a 3 day ban, two more for a week ban and ten infractions is a permanent ban. He got at least two in this thread for two instances of ad hominem attacks.

i do hope that the many others here were punished for their ad hominem attacks as well. With all due respect (and admitting to a bit of bias on my side), i have found attacks by pro-android users to be punished much more severely than those in the pro-apple camp. There are many people here (apple ][) who add far less to conversations than people like solipsismx yet when the latter makes one mistake i see him banned almost immediately.

Not saying that solipsismx wasn't in the wrong (he definitely was with piot), just something i've noticed from reading this site over the past 2-3 years .

Not every post is monitored. That means it's all about who gets reported, not what you actually post.

If we assume a vast majority of the people here love Apple, then anyone that posts something negative about Apple puts themselves in the cross-hairs to be reported by the majority of users when they slip up.

Conversely someone attacking another poster that isn't pro-Apple will be less likely to be reported.

Case in point... this guy will never be banned (for the record that's 14 ad hominem attacks worse than anything AbsoluteDesignz every wrote)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Well as AI's resident douchebag,I'm sure your comments matter on some level... Or just keep being a dick until AI deletes your troll account.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

You are a troll, and not a very smart one.... the discussions here are nearly always hijacked by morons like yourself, and are not moderated worth a damn by AI... If AI had any sense, it would instate Facebook comments that don't really allow phony people to make anonymous comments along the lines of your ignorant crap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Your hate comes from an awareness of your own inferiority combined with an unwillingness to admit you are wrong, so you project your own self loathing upon other people, causing you to scamper to an Apple blog to troll.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

If you feel dirty, it's not necessarily because you're "paying attention," it may also be because you are a dingbat irrational fool who doesn't give much thought to why you believe what you do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

What's really disheartening is that you are consuming oxygen that could otherwise be used for some useful purpose, and instead just pointlessly blowing out hot air and methane.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Posting a seething comment about how the sky is falling because you found one error in a long report just makes you look like a douchbag... Unless your goal is just to be a dick.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

...in the case of the trolls above, just intimating the occurrence of errors they imagine out of arrogant douchbaggery

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

You are so absolutely lacking in your ability to grasp basic logic its mesmerizing that you can line up gibberish in a way that is, for the most part, grammatically and syntactically correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Stop feeling, start thinking. Then you'll spend less time lying on your back pretending to be hurt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Take your meds and a nap, then eat fish and read a book.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

you are either not very smart, or you have some preexisting hope/expectation/faith that prevents you from seeing facts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

If you don't understand the relevance to Apple, go eat fish and read a book.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

And how many worthless comments have you slathered on each of the articles?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Seriously, what a stupid thing to write. Do you also complain on every damn Gizmodo post that what they're saying is negative and not balanced in a universally ecumenical sort of way? STFU
post #325 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I think it's amazing how the Fandroids can praise Android to high heavens - but apparently can't use Google Search.

You've gotten the wrong dates. Here's the history:

Apple's first attempt was iTools - released in 2000. (Note: I'm not claiming that this is the first time that any OS sync'd to the cloud. IIRC, there were third party solutions before that).

Dot Mac replaced iTools in 2002

Mobile Me replaced dot Mac in 2008

And iCloud replaced Mobile Me in 2011.

So iTools was at least 8 years ahead of Android - and long before Android even existed.

Sorry, I'm a little slow here.

So...you're saying that Eric Schmidt never served on the board during iTools development.

Is that correct?
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
post #326 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by divinitus View Post

Its strange so many people don't bother concealing their biasness around here. That aside the nexus is not a developer handset but rather marketed as an alternative for people who do not want to be boiled down with the manufacturer's customizations. In any case it was a valid marketing strategy and they didn't cheat or shortchange anyone for that matter.

Also over here in Singapore the galaxy nexus ran out of stock the day our telcos rolled it out. I guess everyone is entitled to their own preferences and no one is a fool.

1) It's AppleInsider.
2) This site is chalk full of facts and very often when Apple [very rarely] effs up they hear about aggressively.

Then again Apple hears on a daily basis where they go wrong and how they can improve at Apple Support Forums directly. They listen intently and fix what is fixable.

In a Rumors Forum [AppleInsider] we engage in speculation on all fronts, but give far more credence to commentors who have garnered a history of actual intelligence and knowledge on subjects far beyond the average poster.

These folks tend to have worked in the industry and often within Apple and other 3rd parties directly working with Apple so they know what the hell they are talking about.

When Apple really hits it's stride in China and garners an easily attainable 40 million more iPhone units on top of their current trends then please rave on about Samsung in 2013. I look forward to it.
post #327 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I think it's amazing how the Fandroids can praise Android to high heavens - but apparently can't use Google Search.

You've gotten the wrong dates. Here's the history:

Apple's first attempt was iTools - released in 2000. (Note: I'm not claiming that this is the first time that any OS sync'd to the cloud. IIRC, there were third party solutions before that).

Dot Mac replaced iTools in 2002

Mobile Me replaced dot Mac in 2008

And iCloud replaced Mobile Me in 2011.

So iTools was at least 8 years ahead of Android - and long before Android even existed.

If you want to get technical on "OS Syncing", Roaming User Profile in ActiveDirectory predates them all.
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #328 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

Don't be silly they are out there now in the 720p variety. I messed with it at CES, certainly the smoothest looking Android tablet to date, but I still wouldn't touch one. Nvidia's quad (sudo penta) core Tegra 3 platform is quite an impressive design. However it's still based on Cortex A9. The successor due by the fall is based on A15 and 'supposedly' up to 10x more horsepower than the current crappy crop of Tegra 2 tablets.

Here's to hoping Apple really moves the goal posts with A6.

True, but that's not the version everybody's referring to here. They're talking about the true HD version.

Time, I guess, will reveal all things.
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
post #329 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

Global Thermonuclear War always has exactly one winner.

no....there is no winner...
Movie reference here:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086567/

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply
post #330 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

If we assume a vast majority of the people here love Apple...

Classic! I love it!

Do you think you could be jumping to assumptions on a forum called AppleInsider?
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
post #331 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

Give it a break. The only people convinced Apple's IP is being stolen (and that its legitimately their IP) is the lovely followers here, Apple and the courts they convince with money and incompetent opposing defense lawyers (ie samsung lawyers who cant differentiate aspect ratios)

If the only people convinced are Apple, their followers, the courts and the opposing lawyers then I would hazard a guess that things will go quite well for Apple.
post #332 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

Not every post is monitored. That means it's all about who gets reported, not what you actually post.

If we assume a vast majority of the people here love Apple, then anyone that posts something negative about Apple puts themselves in the cross-hairs to be reported by the majority of users when they slip up.

Conversely someone attacking another poster that isn't pro-Apple will be less likely to be reported.

Case in point... this guy will never be banned (for the record that's 14 ad hominem attacks worse than anything AbsoluteDesignz every wrote)

Wow. I never really noticed that guy before. I can't recall a single post by him. But your collection of insults is impressive.
post #333 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

Global Thermonuclear War always has exactly one winner.

Do you really want one winner? We're all copycats, we learn to talk by copying, copy others form of dress, your favorite sports team copies what another team does, the list is endless. Copying happens people and Apple has every right to defend their IP but that doesn't mean they'll be successful.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #334 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by geekdad View Post

no....there is no winner...

Speaking from a religious standpoint, wouldn't Satan be the winner in this case?
post #335 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Do you really want one winner


<Whoosh>
post #336 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

Speaking from a religious standpoint, wouldn't Satan be the winner in this case?

I believe you have a point....if evil wins then yes satan would be the winner....but the end has already been written and the world does not end that way.....

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply
post #337 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by kadndad View Post

I always wonder what makes the iphone so much better then android? Can anybody tell me what that is?

For some reason, I find this very interesting. I must assume this question comes from an honest query concerning a personal bewilderment on how Apple could possibly be viewed by any intelligent person as superior. I must also assume this is a valid point of view, even though I feel (from my perspective) it strains credulity. It is almost as if there are two disparate viewpoints, each founded upon mutually exclusive precepts.

It may be difficult for the poster above to appreciate that the Apple fanbois perspective seems to be one that essentially says "I like what Apple does because I find them to be most in tune to deliver what I need for my digital world. While it is true that, from the perspective of the non-Apple fanbois, it may be said that I have relegated a good deal of autonomy to a trusted source (i.e., Apple) that I might otherwise have reserved to myself, I am more than willing to do so because - up to this point - Apple exceeds the expectations (in delivering the type of desirable products that work really well).

As such, as a member of the Apple fanbois, though I may seem to have waived such tinker rights, in truth my past experiences have shown that there is little or no gain that resulted from my permission and ability to "tinker around with the innards" of a computer and its systems. Truth be told, I am glad that there seems to be a technically superior wellspring (i.e., Apple) which not only produces the products I appreciate, but they do so in an way that I find advantageous to myself.

Given the viral world of most competing non-Apple technology, and the fact that all too often things just don't work right (or at least to the degree I've come to expect from Apple), I would be abhored to learn that Apple suddenly reversed direction and opened their products to the same kind of "individual change" that is the vaunted hallmark of non-Apple products."

To wit the following remarks:

Quote:
Originally Posted by kadndad View Post

The iphone is [supposed to be] better because Apple tells you what you can and can't do with your phone? Millions like android because you have freedom what you can do to your phone. You can add themes, any type of widget, and even there's numerous types of lock screens. I for one love using android. What you can do to it is endless.

Upon examining it, I almost almost inclined to be sympathetic. From my perspective, were I to buy a Ferrari or Lamborghini, a hallmark of pride in ownership would not be a burning desire to change some aspect of it in an attempt to personalize it. Also, I would not be inclined to feel that the options offered by the factory were somehow limiting, and upon receiving delivery, proceed to dismantle the dash and replace the Blaupunkt sound system with some Sound Ordnance Bass Bunkers.

On the other hand (to continue the automobile analogy), were I to buy an inexpensive Detroit car that, for all intents and purposes, was perceived to be the same 4 wheels as the next one, I would probably care a great deal more to be able to customize it and make it somehow "special" - because as it comes to me new out of the box - there is nothing special about it. So it is somehow fitting that I might naturally want to bolt on certain wheel flares and rear spoilers, adorn it with a different paint job, and customize the look or performance of it, and consider my right to do so as a cherished thing indeed.

The expectations of the Ferrari owner as to what Ferrari will deliver to them as a new Ferrari owner is, after all, very different from the expectations of a Dodge owner as to what Dodge will deliver to them as a new Dodge owner. It is a sad fact that the low cost car buyer will often perceive not only the factory as delivering an incomplete product that needs to be customized, but that the entire service and delivery structure (i.e., the Dodge dealership) is also organized to operate in a manner inconsistent with the Dodge buyer's interests.

To this end, it should be pointed out that Apple is perceived by the Apple fanbois to offer the Ferrari type of product and service support structure, while the HPs and Dells of the world occupy the Dodge level in technology.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kadndad View Post

The point I am trying to make is that who gave the right for Apple to wonder this planet suing anyone that is "copying" Apple? Everyone copies everyone. Honda was first to come out with the Vtec engine. Everyone else "copies" and now every engine has their version of "vtec." Most people on this board are acting like babies. Destroy android! destroy android! And why it took 3 long years for Apple to start suing android? Why didn't they start suing from day 1? If we don't "copy" someone else idea and improve on it, we will all still be using tube TVs, rotary phones, and etc. Go to any store and count every clone product out there. Clothes, games, toys, everything.

It is somehow fitting that the Dodge owner/enthusiast typically sees nothing wrong with copying some innovation advanced by someone else. After all, the Dodge owner is the direct beneficiary from such copying, and adaptation to the platform he is relegated to. To hold otherwise, would be to make all too apparent the widening gap between what he has, and what he cannot (or will not) have.

In this type of thinking (which makes a kind of sense if one were to ignore intellectual property as deserving the protections of ownership), the copying of intellectual property is alright as long as it can be justified by improving upon the original. "Improving" typically means adapting to another platform so it will work, thus bringing the benefit to the PC owner. Since it will invariably not be well thought out, continual change is perceived as a benefit, rather than a concession to the limitations of the platform or an homage to an inferior design.

In fact, the longevity of the Apple/Ferrari/Lamborghini designs will be perceived by the HP/Dodge owner not as the outcome of a superior concept that needs little changing in outward appearance, but a sign of weakness. Or worse, that Lamborghini fails to adopt some passing fad or incorporate a trend that has not yet matured, will likewise be perceived by the Dell/Dodge purist as a shortcoming.

To wit:

Quote:
Originally Posted by kadndad View Post

I still don't see anything special about the iphone. For the last 5 years, the iphone still looks the same. Android; however, has changed so much. The phones have improved, the OS has improved, everything. Android has added NFC, 3D, face unlock, and the list goes on. What has Apple added to make it that much more? My 3 reason why i do not like the iphone, the screen is too small. I have a droid Eris. Can't stand the screen size. The OS is boring. Number 3, seen one you seen them all. Can anyone change my mind why the iphone is much better?

I doubt anyone could change your mind, nor should they even try. Given the above, if I were to stand in your shoes, I would be inclined to agree with you. You should understand, though (from your perspective), for those willing to spend too much on an Apple product, it is at least our perception (wrong though it may be) that we are receiving the right balance of user satisfaction when weighed against our loss of input control.

Go forth and prosper, my friend. Best wishes to you!
post #338 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by meh 2 View Post

For some reason, I find this very interesting. I must assume this question comes from an honest query concerning a personal bewilderment on how Apple could possibly be viewed by any intelligent person as superior. I must also assume this is a valid point of view, even though I feel (from my perspective) it strains credulity. It is almost as if there are two disparate viewpoints, each founded upon mutually exclusive precepts.

It may be difficult for the poster above to appreciate that the Apple fanbois perspective seems to be one that essentially says "I like what Apple does because I find them to be most in tune to deliver what I need for my digital world. While it is true that, from the perspective of the non-Apple fanbois, it may be said that I have relegated a good deal of autonomy to a trusted source (i.e., Apple) that I might otherwise have reserved to myself, I am more than willing to do so because - up to this point - Apple exceeds the expectations (in delivering the type of desirable products that work really well).

As such, as a member of the Apple fanbois, though I may seem to have waived such tinker rights, in truth my past experiences have shown that there is little or no gain that resulted from my permission and ability to "tinker around with the innards" of a computer and its systems. Truth be told, I am glad that there seems to be a technically superior wellspring (i.e., Apple) which not only produces the products I appreciate, but they do so in an way that I find advantageous to myself.

Given the viral world of most competing non-Apple technology, and the fact that all too often things just don't work right (or at least to the degree I've come to expect from Apple), I would be abhored to learn that Apple suddenly reversed direction and opened their products to the same kind of "individual change" that is the vaunted hallmark of non-Apple products."

To wit the following remarks:



Upon examining it, I almost almost inclined to be sympathetic. From my perspective, were I to buy a Ferrari or Lamborghini, a hallmark of pride in ownership would not be a burning desire to change some aspect of it in an attempt to personalize it. Also, I would not be inclined to feel that the options offered by the factory were somehow limiting, and upon receiving delivery, proceed to dismantle the dash and replace the Blaupunkt sound system with some Sound Ordnance Bass Bunkers.

On the other hand (to continue the automobile analogy), were I to buy an inexpensive Detroit car that, for all intents and purposes, was perceived to be the same 4 wheels as the next one, I would probably care a great deal more to be able to customize it and make it somehow "special" - because as it comes to me new out of the box - there is nothing special about it. So it is somehow fitting that I might naturally want to bolt on certain wheel flares and rear spoilers, adorn it with a different paint job, and customize the look or performance of it, and consider my right to do so as a cherished thing indeed.

The expectations of the Ferrari owner as to what Ferrari will deliver to them as a new Ferrari owner is, after all, very different from the expectations of a Dodge owner as to what Dodge will deliver to them as a new Dodge owner. It is a sad fact that the low cost car buyer will often perceive not only the factory as delivering an incomplete product that needs to be customized, but that the entire service and delivery structure (i.e., the Dodge dealership) is also organized to operate in a manner inconsistent with the Dodge buyer's interests.

To this end, it should be pointed out that Apple is perceived by the Apple fanbois to offer the Ferrari type of product and service support structure, while the HPs and Dells of the world occupy the Dodge level in technology.



It is somehow fitting that the Dodge owner/enthusiast typically sees nothing wrong with copying some innovation advanced by someone else. After all, the Dodge owner is the direct beneficiary from such copying, and adaptation to the platform he is relegated to. To hold otherwise, would be to make all too apparent the widening gap between what he has, and what he cannot (or will not) have.

In this type of thinking (which makes a kind of sense if one were to ignore intellectual property as deserving the protections of ownership), the copying of intellectual property is alright as long as it can be justified by improving upon the original. "Improving" typically means adapting to another platform so it will work, thus bringing the benefit to the PC owner. Since it will invariably not be well thought out, continual change is perceived as a benefit, rather than a concession to the limitations of the platform or an homage to an inferior design.

In fact, the longevity of the Apple/Ferrari/Lamborghini designs will be perceived by the HP/Dodge owner not as the outcome of a superior concept that needs little changing in outward appearance, but a sign of weakness. Or worse, that Lamborghini fails to adopt some passing fad or incorporate a trend that has not yet matured, will likewise be perceived by the Dell/Dodge purist as a shortcoming.

To wit:



I doubt anyone could change your mind, nor should they even try. Given the above, if I were to stand in your shoes, I would be inclined to agree with you. You should understand, though (from your perspective), for those willing to spend too much on an Apple product, it is at least our perception (wrong though it may be) that we are receiving the right balance of user satisfaction when weighed against our loss of input control.

Go forth and prosper, my friend. Best wishes to you!

This reply needs to be coated in a translucent gold material and placed somewhere where it will not be licked.

Damn.
Fine.
Answer.
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
post #339 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by topgun966 View Post

Ok first of all it is no secret that I tend to lean more at Google. I personally own a Galaxy Nexus as my daily phone and a Galaxy Tab 10.1 for my tablet. But I also own a iPod touch 4g and own a decent amount of stock in Apple and Google.
I am also a real true to the core tech buff. I love technology in general. I want to see companies come out with new and great things. I would LOVE to see Apple go head to head with the best Google comes up with (Right now, ICS on the Nexus) and let the best phone win. The Nexus is NOTHING like any Apple product. It does not look like, feel like, nor work in anyway shape or form like iOS. There is no way you can confuse it. I want to see Apple do something new and different. However at this point, I think they are out of steam. Look at the launch of the past couple iOS's. Almost every feature has been a direct copy of its competitor. Don't get me wrong I am not saying that is a bad thing. You can take someone else's idea and improve on it. That is how we move ahead in the world. Apple did not come up with the touch screen smart phone. They took someone else's idea and improved it. Came up with better marketing which was better for everyone. Now they have this idea that they are the only ones that should have it now.
I would LOVE to see Apple to come out with something great and push innovation farther. That is win win for everyone. However the trend they are doing is looking like that isn't going to happen anytime soon. I hope for my stock sake, and my thirst for tech, they do.

As for the people here blindly saying go Apple without actually looking at both the merits of the case, as well as look at the competing phone, I would urge you to head to your local Verizon store and at least check it out. If you can honestly say it looks or acts anything like an iPhone from an objective point of view....then you win.


I was in Best Buy and Samsung had a display in the front of the store. I witnessed two people walk buy and comment on Samsung's offering as the "iPhone." Rightfully so, as many of Samsung's products look like the iPhone. You can't say the same with the Nokia Lumia.

Moreover, Apple was the first company to do touch screen correct, and to incorporate multi-touch. Many titans from companies like Nokia. RIM, and Microsoft didn't think the iPhone was capable of doing what Apple promised it would do, and predicted it would fail. Apple is a design driven company. It differentiates itself through design. As such, it doesn't want competitors aping its designs.

Further, Apple isn't sue happy. Apple didn't sue Palm over WebOS even though Palm did some brave things like hack into iTunes without Apple's permission. Apple further isn't grumbling over Microsoft Windows Phone. This is because both Palm and Microsoft's offering are different. Apple just wants it's designs to be respected. Don't make your OS and phones similar to the iPhone.

Interestingly enough, if Microsoft can get some sales, it truly is the party offering innovation to try and compete with Apple. Further, if I couldn't use an iPhone, I would buy a Windows Phone offering. The Nokia Lumia is more appealing and better made than Google's offerings.

Finally, Apple shouldn't have to change its OS around to differentiate itself if other companies are just going to keep taking the designs.
post #340 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

Case in point... this guy will never be banned (for the record that's 14 ad hominem attacks worse than anything AbsoluteDesignz every wrote)

I've never noticed his attacks before but if you report them then I can't see why he wouldn't get infractions and banned if he kept doing them.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #341 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I've never noticed his attacks before but if you report them then I can't see why he wouldn't get infractions and banned if he kept doing them.

Ummm...
Really Solipsism? There's no reason you can imagine why that wouldn't happen?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #342 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Ummm...
Really Solipsism? There's no reason you can imagine why that wouldn't happen?

None.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #343 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Further, Apple isn't sue happy. Apple didn't sue Palm over WebOS even though Palm did some brave things like hack into iTunes without Apple's permission. Apple further isn't grumbling over Microsoft Windows Phone. This is because both Palm and Microsoft's offering are different.

There's probably some truth there. The larger fact is both of these guys have a ton of legit patents to back up everything they've done. Palm has more than double the number of mobile telecommunications patents Apple has. Microsoft is about 8x and Nokia 10x. Apple may be bold, and rightly defensive at times, but they aren't stupid.
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #344 of 446
Deleted
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #345 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Sorry, I'm a little slow here.

So...you're saying that Eric Schmidt never served on the board during iTools development.

Is that correct?

No, it's not. Please try to keep up.

Someone claimed that Apple copied the concept from Android because Android had it in 2008 and they claimed that Apple didn't have it before that. I simply showed that they were wrong and Apple had it at least 8 years before it showed up in Android.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

If you want to get technical on "OS Syncing", Roaming User Profile in ActiveDirectory predates them all.

Which is why I specifically stated that I was not taking the position that Apple was first.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #346 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by meh 2 View Post

For some reason, I find this very interesting. I must assume this question comes from an honest query concerning a personal bewilderment on how Apple could possibly be viewed by any intelligent person as superior. I must also assume this is a valid point of view, even though I feel (from my perspective) it strains credulity. It is almost as if there are two disparate viewpoints, each founded upon mutually exclusive precepts.

It may be difficult for the poster above to appreciate that the Apple fanbois perspective seems to be one that essentially says "I like what Apple does because I find them to be most in tune to deliver what I need for my digital world. While it is true that, from the perspective of the non-Apple fanbois, it may be said that I have relegated a good deal of autonomy to a trusted source (i.e., Apple) that I might otherwise have reserved to myself, I am more than willing to do so because - up to this point - Apple exceeds the expectations (in delivering the type of desirable products that work really well).

As such, as a member of the Apple fanbois, though I may seem to have waived such tinker rights, in truth my past experiences have shown that there is little or no gain that resulted from my permission and ability to "tinker around with the innards" of a computer and its systems. Truth be told, I am glad that there seems to be a technically superior wellspring (i.e., Apple) which not only produces the products I appreciate, but they do so in an way that I find advantageous to myself.

Given the viral world of most competing non-Apple technology, and the fact that all too often things just don't work right (or at least to the degree I've come to expect from Apple), I would be abhored to learn that Apple suddenly reversed direction and opened their products to the same kind of "individual change" that is the vaunted hallmark of non-Apple products."

To wit the following remarks:



Upon examining it, I almost almost inclined to be sympathetic. From my perspective, were I to buy a Ferrari or Lamborghini, a hallmark of pride in ownership would not be a burning desire to change some aspect of it in an attempt to personalize it. Also, I would not be inclined to feel that the options offered by the factory were somehow limiting, and upon receiving delivery, proceed to dismantle the dash and replace the Blaupunkt sound system with some Sound Ordnance Bass Bunkers.

On the other hand (to continue the automobile analogy), were I to buy an inexpensive Detroit car that, for all intents and purposes, was perceived to be the same 4 wheels as the next one, I would probably care a great deal more to be able to customize it and make it somehow "special" - because as it comes to me new out of the box - there is nothing special about it. So it is somehow fitting that I might naturally want to bolt on certain wheel flares and rear spoilers, adorn it with a different paint job, and customize the look or performance of it, and consider my right to do so as a cherished thing indeed.

The expectations of the Ferrari owner as to what Ferrari will deliver to them as a new Ferrari owner is, after all, very different from the expectations of a Dodge owner as to what Dodge will deliver to them as a new Dodge owner. It is a sad fact that the low cost car buyer will often perceive not only the factory as delivering an incomplete product that needs to be customized, but that the entire service and delivery structure (i.e., the Dodge dealership) is also organized to operate in a manner inconsistent with the Dodge buyer's interests.

To this end, it should be pointed out that Apple is perceived by the Apple fanbois to offer the Ferrari type of product and service support structure, while the HPs and Dells of the world occupy the Dodge level in technology.



It is somehow fitting that the Dodge owner/enthusiast typically sees nothing wrong with copying some innovation advanced by someone else. After all, the Dodge owner is the direct beneficiary from such copying, and adaptation to the platform he is relegated to. To hold otherwise, would be to make all too apparent the widening gap between what he has, and what he cannot (or will not) have.

In this type of thinking (which makes a kind of sense if one were to ignore intellectual property as deserving the protections of ownership), the copying of intellectual property is alright as long as it can be justified by improving upon the original. "Improving" typically means adapting to another platform so it will work, thus bringing the benefit to the PC owner. Since it will invariably not be well thought out, continual change is perceived as a benefit, rather than a concession to the limitations of the platform or an homage to an inferior design.

In fact, the longevity of the Apple/Ferrari/Lamborghini designs will be perceived by the HP/Dodge owner not as the outcome of a superior concept that needs little changing in outward appearance, but a sign of weakness. Or worse, that Lamborghini fails to adopt some passing fad or incorporate a trend that has not yet matured, will likewise be perceived by the Dell/Dodge purist as a shortcoming.

To wit:



I doubt anyone could change your mind, nor should they even try. Given the above, if I were to stand in your shoes, I would be inclined to agree with you. You should understand, though (from your perspective), for those willing to spend too much on an Apple product, it is at least our perception (wrong though it may be) that we are receiving the right balance of user satisfaction when weighed against our loss of input control.

Go forth and prosper, my friend. Best wishes to you!

Fantastically written with apt analogies. Well done!

Oh, but there is just one flaw. Even the guy with the Dodge doesn't have to root it just to reprogram the radio stations! It blew my mind to learn about this from someone at work about his "more customizable" Samsung Galaxy S2 and his preinstalled applications.

iPhone 5 64GB, iPhone 4S 16GB, mid-2011 iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply

iPhone 5 64GB, iPhone 4S 16GB, mid-2011 iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply
post #347 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Here, post 13 then post 18.

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...07#post2017807

You sure about that?
post #348 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

You sure about that?

Deleted
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #349 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

...and Larry Page makes a few ineffective gestures in the air and tries to break a chair a la Ballmer.

Endgame is not far off. Apple's lawyers make Steve Jobs look like Mr. Nice Guy in comparison.

I don't think they have to try to make Jobs look like a nice guy. He WAS a nice guy, at least at that point in his life when he chose to mentor the Google boys. I think apple has been straight up with their legal cases. Where they can, they ask nicely first. When other companies want to take the shortcut across your back your company must respond with firm deterrence. Apple has come at this in all propriety, no one can fault them for defending patents they have been working on for ten years.

I worry this is misrepresented in the media at large, like Apple is suddenly evil because they are finally really makin it? Apple does need to worry how the world sees this. A little, anyways. Ah, they will just not give a crap about hype, what can they do really.
What is really factored into the price is a kind of perpetual sense of disbelief that any company could be as good as Apple is. ~Retrogusto
Reply
What is really factored into the price is a kind of perpetual sense of disbelief that any company could be as good as Apple is. ~Retrogusto
Reply
post #350 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

You know we can't ever be sure about anything. You be the judge based on the the two posts along with the lack of any language editing by mods.

But what made you think that when you posted #13?
post #351 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

But what made you think that when you posted #13?

EDIT: Just a hunch I suppose
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #352 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

well you totally missed the point. Much of the Apple IP is a sham. If Apple did anything right, it was filing trivial (likely to be invalidated in due time) patents and jumping into the lawsuit business early. You Apple guys having been declaring Android doom for years now while the platform's momentum has continued regardless. I don't buy the stolen OS droning, whilst understanding that much of Apple's IP was stolen from other companies in the first place. If i were to guess, Android will continue to thrive and companies will continue to sue each other.

I don't agree with your views. I would like to know since based on your comments you obviously must know, exactly whose IP did Apple steal? If they stole IP why aren't they being sued by the owners of the IP they supposedly stole?. Please sight specific instances not generalities.
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."
Reply
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."
Reply
post #353 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Realistic View Post

I don't agree with your views. I would like to know since based on your comments you obviously must know, exactly whose IP did Apple steal? If they stole IP why aren't they being sued by the owners of the IP they supposedly stole?. Please sight specific instances not generalities.


Apple is currently being sued by many, many companies for theft of IP.
post #354 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I've never noticed his attacks before but if you report them then I can't see why he wouldn't get infractions and banned if he kept doing them.

I'm sure as hell not going to report him! I'd rather keep my account thank you very much!
post #355 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I think he meant to write AbsoluteDesignz since he references piot.

And I have stepped over the line before. I do try to word my digs in such a way that they aren't technically ad hominen attacks and thus are unseen by mod radar sweeps but every now and then I catch a bullet.

You are correct, I meant AbsoluteDesignz. I apologize for that mistake.
TalkAndroid anyone?
Reply
TalkAndroid anyone?
Reply
post #356 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

<Whoosh>

Did you just flush yourself down the toilet?
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #357 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

No, it's not. Please try to keep up.

Someone claimed that Apple copied the concept from Android because Android had it in 2008 and they claimed that Apple didn't have it before that. I simply showed that they were wrong and Apple had it at least 8 years before it showed up in Android.

Which is why I specifically stated that I was not taking the position that Apple was first.

Sarcasm.

Conveyed well it was not (as Yoda would say).

That was a dig at Eric Schmidt (why does auto-correct change this to 'Shit'?).
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
post #358 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by meh 2 View Post

For some reason, I find this very interesting. I must assume this question comes from an honest query concerning a personal bewilderment on how Apple could possibly be viewed by any intelligent person as superior. I must also assume this is a valid point of view, even though I feel (from my perspective) it strains credulity. It is almost as if there are two disparate viewpoints, each founded upon mutually exclusive precepts.

It may be difficult for the poster above to appreciate that the Apple fanbois perspective seems to be one that essentially says "I like what Apple does because I find them to be most in tune to deliver what I need for my digital world. While it is true that, from the perspective of the non-Apple fanbois, it may be said that I have relegated a good deal of autonomy to a trusted source (i.e., Apple) that I might otherwise have reserved to myself, I am more than willing to do so because - up to this point - Apple exceeds the expectations (in delivering the type of desirable products that work really well).

As such, as a member of the Apple fanbois, though I may seem to have waived such tinker rights, in truth my past experiences have shown that there is little or no gain that resulted from my permission and ability to "tinker around with the innards" of a computer and its systems. Truth be told, I am glad that there seems to be a technically superior wellspring (i.e., Apple) which not only produces the products I appreciate, but they do so in an way that I find advantageous to myself.

Given the viral world of most competing non-Apple technology, and the fact that all too often things just don't work right (or at least to the degree I've come to expect from Apple), I would be abhored to learn that Apple suddenly reversed direction and opened their products to the same kind of "individual change" that is the vaunted hallmark of non-Apple products."

To wit the following remarks:



Upon examining it, I almost almost inclined to be sympathetic. From my perspective, were I to buy a Ferrari or Lamborghini, a hallmark of pride in ownership would not be a burning desire to change some aspect of it in an attempt to personalize it. Also, I would not be inclined to feel that the options offered by the factory were somehow limiting, and upon receiving delivery, proceed to dismantle the dash and replace the Blaupunkt sound system with some Sound Ordnance Bass Bunkers.

On the other hand (to continue the automobile analogy), were I to buy an inexpensive Detroit car that, for all intents and purposes, was perceived to be the same 4 wheels as the next one, I would probably care a great deal more to be able to customize it and make it somehow "special" - because as it comes to me new out of the box - there is nothing special about it. So it is somehow fitting that I might naturally want to bolt on certain wheel flares and rear spoilers, adorn it with a different paint job, and customize the look or performance of it, and consider my right to do so as a cherished thing indeed.

The expectations of the Ferrari owner as to what Ferrari will deliver to them as a new Ferrari owner is, after all, very different from the expectations of a Dodge owner as to what Dodge will deliver to them as a new Dodge owner. It is a sad fact that the low cost car buyer will often perceive not only the factory as delivering an incomplete product that needs to be customized, but that the entire service and delivery structure (i.e., the Dodge dealership) is also organized to operate in a manner inconsistent with the Dodge buyer's interests.

To this end, it should be pointed out that Apple is perceived by the Apple fanbois to offer the Ferrari type of product and service support structure, while the HPs and Dells of the world occupy the Dodge level in technology.



It is somehow fitting that the Dodge owner/enthusiast typically sees nothing wrong with copying some innovation advanced by someone else. After all, the Dodge owner is the direct beneficiary from such copying, and adaptation to the platform he is relegated to. To hold otherwise, would be to make all too apparent the widening gap between what he has, and what he cannot (or will not) have.

In this type of thinking (which makes a kind of sense if one were to ignore intellectual property as deserving the protections of ownership), the copying of intellectual property is alright as long as it can be justified by improving upon the original. "Improving" typically means adapting to another platform so it will work, thus bringing the benefit to the PC owner. Since it will invariably not be well thought out, continual change is perceived as a benefit, rather than a concession to the limitations of the platform or an homage to an inferior design.

In fact, the longevity of the Apple/Ferrari/Lamborghini designs will be perceived by the HP/Dodge owner not as the outcome of a superior concept that needs little changing in outward appearance, but a sign of weakness. Or worse, that Lamborghini fails to adopt some passing fad or incorporate a trend that has not yet matured, will likewise be perceived by the Dell/Dodge purist as a shortcoming.

To wit:



I doubt anyone could change your mind, nor should they even try. Given the above, if I were to stand in your shoes, I would be inclined to agree with you. You should understand, though (from your perspective), for those willing to spend too much on an Apple product, it is at least our perception (wrong though it may be) that we are receiving the right balance of user satisfaction when weighed against our loss of input control.

Go forth and prosper, my friend. Best wishes to you!

Nice try but wrong. You may like your iPhone the way Apple wants it to be but there's a very large group of iPhone owners that do not and jailbreak their phones and customize the heck out of it. You Dodge analogy doesn't hold water because only a small percentage of them customize. Comparing an iPhone to a Ferrari is asinine, its the best selling phone right? So what's the best selling car? a Toyota Corolla? Why? Because they just work. Low repair rate, and long lasting. That makes more sense.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #359 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

You are seriously deluded here. Almost everything you say here is factually incorrect or irrelevant. I simply don't understand how you can't see that.

A PenTile display is "The first true HD display"??? (Almost all Nexus's in existence don't even have that).

NFC in the phone is "innovating"??? (the chips have been available for years and NFC is a blended hardware/software thing anyway and not about including a chip in the phone).

iOS 5 has Siri (the first such service of it's kind), but "isn't innovative?"

Google introduces a self-evident manner of doing notifications, that is in fact a copy of the way Palm used to do notifications that is itself a copy of the way Apple used to do notifications and this is "original" and "innovative" and Apple's notifications are somehow a "copy"???? Why? Because whomever copies last is at fault somehow?

I'll agree Siri is innovative but it wasn't Apples innovation, they bought it.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #360 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by meh 2 View Post

For some reason, I find this very interesting. I must assume this question comes from an honest query concerning a personal bewilderment on how Apple could possibly be viewed by any intelligent person as superior. I must also assume this is a valid point of view, even though I feel (from my perspective) it strains credulity. It is almost as if there are two disparate viewpoints, each founded upon mutually exclusive precepts.

It may be difficult for the poster above to appreciate that the Apple fanbois perspective seems to be one that essentially says "I like what Apple does because I find them to be most in tune to deliver what I need for my digital world. While it is true that, from the perspective of the non-Apple fanbois, it may be said that I have relegated a good deal of autonomy to a trusted source (i.e., Apple) that I might otherwise have reserved to myself, I am more than willing to do so because - up to this point - Apple exceeds the expectations (in delivering the type of desirable products that work really well).

As such, as a member of the Apple fanbois, though I may seem to have waived such tinker rights, in truth my past experiences have shown that there is little or no gain that resulted from my permission and ability to "tinker around with the innards" of a computer and its systems. Truth be told, I am glad that there seems to be a technically superior wellspring (i.e., Apple) which not only produces the products I appreciate, but they do so in an way that I find advantageous to myself.

Given the viral world of most competing non-Apple technology, and the fact that all too often things just don't work right (or at least to the degree I've come to expect from Apple), I would be abhored to learn that Apple suddenly reversed direction and opened their products to the same kind of "individual change" that is the vaunted hallmark of non-Apple products."

To wit the following remarks:



Upon examining it, I almost almost inclined to be sympathetic. From my perspective, were I to buy a Ferrari or Lamborghini, a hallmark of pride in ownership would not be a burning desire to change some aspect of it in an attempt to personalize it. Also, I would not be inclined to feel that the options offered by the factory were somehow limiting, and upon receiving delivery, proceed to dismantle the dash and replace the Blaupunkt sound system with some Sound Ordnance Bass Bunkers.

On the other hand (to continue the automobile analogy), were I to buy an inexpensive Detroit car that, for all intents and purposes, was perceived to be the same 4 wheels as the next one, I would probably care a great deal more to be able to customize it and make it somehow "special" - because as it comes to me new out of the box - there is nothing special about it. So it is somehow fitting that I might naturally want to bolt on certain wheel flares and rear spoilers, adorn it with a different paint job, and customize the look or performance of it, and consider my right to do so as a cherished thing indeed.

The expectations of the Ferrari owner as to what Ferrari will deliver to them as a new Ferrari owner is, after all, very different from the expectations of a Dodge owner as to what Dodge will deliver to them as a new Dodge owner. It is a sad fact that the low cost car buyer will often perceive not only the factory as delivering an incomplete product that needs to be customized, but that the entire service and delivery structure (i.e., the Dodge dealership) is also organized to operate in a manner inconsistent with the Dodge buyer's interests.

To this end, it should be pointed out that Apple is perceived by the Apple fanbois to offer the Ferrari type of product and service support structure, while the HPs and Dells of the world occupy the Dodge level in technology.



It is somehow fitting that the Dodge owner/enthusiast typically sees nothing wrong with copying some innovation advanced by someone else. After all, the Dodge owner is the direct beneficiary from such copying, and adaptation to the platform he is relegated to. To hold otherwise, would be to make all too apparent the widening gap between what he has, and what he cannot (or will not) have.

In this type of thinking (which makes a kind of sense if one were to ignore intellectual property as deserving the protections of ownership), the copying of intellectual property is alright as long as it can be justified by improving upon the original. "Improving" typically means adapting to another platform so it will work, thus bringing the benefit to the PC owner. Since it will invariably not be well thought out, continual change is perceived as a benefit, rather than a concession to the limitations of the platform or an homage to an inferior design.

In fact, the longevity of the Apple/Ferrari/Lamborghini designs will be perceived by the HP/Dodge owner not as the outcome of a superior concept that needs little changing in outward appearance, but a sign of weakness. Or worse, that Lamborghini fails to adopt some passing fad or incorporate a trend that has not yet matured, will likewise be perceived by the Dell/Dodge purist as a shortcoming.

To wit:



I doubt anyone could change your mind, nor should they even try. Given the above, if I were to stand in your shoes, I would be inclined to agree with you. You should understand, though (from your perspective), for those willing to spend too much on an Apple product, it is at least our perception (wrong though it may be) that we are receiving the right balance of user satisfaction when weighed against our loss of input control.

Go forth and prosper, my friend. Best wishes to you!

Everyone stop posting, it's been done to perfection! That was so good it deserves it's own background music!

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Apple asks for US preliminary injunction of Samsung's Android 4.0 Galaxy Nexus
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple asks for US preliminary injunction of Samsung's Android 4.0 Galaxy Nexus