or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple wins injunction against Samsung Galaxy Nexus smartphone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple wins injunction against Samsung Galaxy Nexus smartphone - Page 6

post #201 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I headed over to Engadget for a few laughs, a site which I rarely visit anymore, because the comment sections are infested with ignorant trash and human garbage, but it was pretty funny and also pretty predictable to read some of the whiny and hateful comments being made by the butthurt Fandroids there. Hopefully there are more bans and injunctions coming in the future, it makes me feel good to see other ignorant people mad.

 

And have you read the type of comments on Apple Insider? The levels of fanboy-ism here are beyond belief, no other site comes close.

 

I used to be fanboy for Commodore products back in the day, WHEN I WAS EIGHT YEARS OLD.  Then I grew up, and learnt the enjoy good tech whoever made it. It's absurd and moronic to have slavish devotion to global mega companies, as they exist purely to make a profit and couldn't give a damn what any idiotic fanboy thinks or does.

 

As for Apple vs Google, it's pathetic, childish, and makes them both look terrible in the eyes of consumers. Android is far from being a clone of iOS anymore, but there are certain problems that have common solutions, such as the ability to search using voice. In this case, to be frank, it just looks like Apple are feeling the heat and resorting to dirty tricks. It stinks.

post #202 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

 

not that it would make any difference, but feel free to donate all your shares of Apple to the Apple Legal Defense fund.  

No need to. Samsung as the loser will pay patent fee and legal cost.

Fun and relaxing way to prepare Japanese Language Proficiency Test (JLPT) test with Juku Apps
Reply
Fun and relaxing way to prepare Japanese Language Proficiency Test (JLPT) test with Juku Apps
Reply
post #203 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

 

 

 

You guys can dance around all you want imagining that Google has been some big litigator. Instead it's more of the "we against the world" attitude carried over from back in the day when Apple really was "we against the world". Google hasn't sued Apple. Google hasn't sued Microsoft.

 

Simply find a case where Google has initiated an IP lawsuit against a competitor. Any competitor will do. There's gotta be several of those over their 15 years of existence considering the attacks they get from all sides. Surely they've at least turned around and filed their own counter-suit IP claims in defense.  Even forget an whether IP is involved. Find any lawsuit they've filed against a competitor, just one, and I'll happily acknowledge that I'm wrong.

 

Buying a company with active litigation going on is not Google suing a competitor.

Selling patents to HTC that are used for HTC defense is not Google suing a competitor.

Announcing they wish to purchase some company who has on-going issues with a competitor is not Google suing a competitor.

 

Wait until they actually put their name to a lawsuit against Apple, or Microsoft or Oracle or whoever. Then everyone can have a go on how it's proof of how evil Google is, attacking it's rivals in court rather than the marketplace. It will probably happen eventually. I'm shocked Google hasn't done so already with the Microsoft/Apple gang-bang going on. So far not one forum member can find an actual case where they have. Think there might be a reason for that?

I think you forgot, if Google didn't buy Motorola, Google will be one of Motorola patents infringer.

Fun and relaxing way to prepare Japanese Language Proficiency Test (JLPT) test with Juku Apps
Reply
Fun and relaxing way to prepare Japanese Language Proficiency Test (JLPT) test with Juku Apps
Reply
post #204 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

I dont think his trying to say that Apple stole the design from Samsung. Merely that Samsung did have devices with that form factor before the iPad came out. Let's hope Apple doesnt get caught in a lie again like they did in Germany.
http://www.brandidentitytheft.com/blog/aa840358dd9711e094224abfe0de1c23/The_Case_of_the_Identical_Tablet:_Apple_vs_Samsung
fredaroony I got a new pic you can post over and over
696

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

Really? People are still whining about this picture? It's a resizing issue, nothing more.

No EricTheHalfBee, it is not a resizing issue. Remember the case was a "look and feel" case. Apple presented manipulated image in regard to Samsung Galaxy Tab just to look like IPad, IMO. No one would think they have different ratio. In reality, they are different. iPad is chunky, but Galaxy Tab is much thinner and taller.

If were just a resizing issue as you claim, GT would be much thinner with same height.
post #205 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

And have you read the type of comments on Apple Insider? The levels of fanboy-ism here are beyond belief, no other site comes close.

That's not unexpected on a site that's Apple-centric although there's plenty of Apple bashing going and legit criticism. On a site like Engadget though, they're suppose to be platform agnostic but they have an overriding bottom-llne to promote tech of any kind. Even if Apple had an air-tight case against Samsung or Google, sites like Engadget aren't going to support Apple's legal strategy because it would ultimately mean less tech to promote if Apple were successful. As such, there's precious little objective reporting with respect to these issues. As for myself, while I'm a fan of Apple products, I'm not a fan of their legal strategy because they will almost certainly lose these patent war even if they manage to eek out a few temporary battle victories such as this preliminary injunction. Instead of burning cash up on their lawyers and the court system, I would much rather see them innovating and making substantial improvement to to iOS and iCloud.

Also, when Tim Cook said he hated litigation, he was being disingenuous at best and in fact he is all in on litigation and has every intention to fulfill the thermonuclear legal directives of Steve Jobs. The question though is whether or not Apple is attempting to stop other companies from making knock-offs or are they attempting to stop competitors from making a better mousetrap.
Edited by markbyrn - 7/1/12 at 1:57am
post #206 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

hill60,
Trust me my phone does not have any lag (yes my Nexus is rooted, but I have not tweaked any yet because I don't need at the moment)
I found that colourfull widgets may cause some lags. So, I removed not soused colourfull widgets from home screen except the stock gallery widget. I use alots of widgets 4 home screen full, but all of them are transparent (glass or smoked glass) except two, a flash light switch and the gallery widget.
You can customise and optimize your requirement with Galaxy Nexus. You don't really need to root. Some people do not care some lags, so they maximize the potential. If you set it just like iPhone, it would not lag, IMO.

 

So Google is wasting their time with their Jellybean fixing lag via Butter, which according to you is not needed.

 

Who is lying, then?

A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #207 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbyrn View Post


That's not unexpected on a site that's Apple-centric although there's plenty of Apple bashing going and legit criticism. On a site like Engadget though, they're suppose to be platform agnostic but they have an overriding bottom-llne to promote tech of any kind. Even if Apple had an air-tight case against Samsung or Google, sites like Engadget aren't going to support Apple's legal strategy because it would ultimately mean less tech to promote if Apple were successful. As such, there's precious little objective reporting with respect to these issues. As for myself, while I'm a fan of Apple products, I'm not a fan of their legal strategy because they will almost certainly lose these patent war even if they manage to eek out a few temporary battle victories such as this preliminary injunction. Instead of burning cash up on their lawyers and the court system, I would much rather see them innovating and making substantial improvement to to iOS and iCloud.
Also, when Tim Cook said he hated litigation, he was being disingenuous at best and in fact he is all in on litigation and has every intention to fulfill the thermonuclear legal directives of Steve Jobs. The question though is whether or not Apple is attempting to stop other companies from making knock-offs or are they attempting to stop competitors from making a better mousetrap.

 

Get a clue, the one thing Steve Jobs and now Tim Cook hated more than litigation was PEOPLE STEALING THEIR STUFF.

 

Apple only litigates against people who deserve it, there are plenty of companies that design around Apple's IP and they are not being sued.

 

Sony for example.

A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #208 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbyrn View Post
Also, when Tim Cook said he hated litigation, he was being disingenuous at best and in fact he is all in on litigation and has every intention to fulfill the thermonuclear legal directives of Steve Jobs. The question though is whether or not Apple is attempting to stop other companies from making knock-offs or are they attempting to stop competitors from making a better mousetrap.

...and there you go. That's the issue with software patents. A company holding the rights may have the honest intent of only protecting their specific innovation in their specific product. Another may have the intent of using vaguely written IP to strongly discourage new entrants and block serious competitors in "their" market, stifling innovation and creative product ideas.

 

"Wow. those guys really came up with a great idea. Heck of a crew they've got. You have to admire them"

"What they've done has really got me excited about our own product line and has me thinking outside our own box. Take their latest idea"

 

" While it's a great start, and they should be commended, I don't think they understand where they've limited it. If you begin with what they've done and look at it with (whatever) in mind instead of (whatever) then you could do this. Change the interface to allow (whatever), add the ability to work with the (whatever) as well as tweak the idea that you should be able to (whatever) and you end up with a feature that truly works for a whole range of uses." 

 

Why should thinking about ways to improve another's ideas be stifled by fears that your bigger richer competitor is going to bring every courtroom attack they can.  How does it help innovation if your competitor can find one interpretation of some previously unknown software IP claim to see that your "better mousetrap" is banished or at least delayed long enough that your innovative improvements in a device that competitor may not be interested in building anyway don't matter anymore?


Edited by Gatorguy - 7/1/12 at 5:08am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #209 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

...and there you go. That's the issue with software patents. A company holding the rights may have the honest intent of only protecting their specific innovation in their specific product. Another may have the intent of using vaguely written IP to strongly discourage new entrants and block serious competitors in "their" market.


While, another company may, lie, cheat, steal, defraud standards bodies, and pay people like you to come to web sites like this to defend and cover up their actions.

 

And, I see above you've been promoting that particular fiction, again, that Google isn't wielding standards essential patents, that were pledged to FRAND licensing, like a baseball bat. But, as pointed out, all these Motorola lawsuits are really Google law suits, and we know that Google specifically approved all of them.

 

Google is a completely dishonest company whose word means nothing. Remember net neutrality, and how fast they sold that out once it was to their advantage? Now we've seen all this double speak on patents (apparently, the reason they bought Motorola wasn't for Moto's patent, but to use Moto as a patent trolling front), where they, again, say one thing and do another. We have impressive claims about Android activations for which there is no corroborating evidence. Basically, Google's word is completely worthless. Don't bother reading their privacy policy because they aren't going to follow it. Careful buying click through ads from them because if they count those like Android activations, you may pay for a lot more traffic than you ever get.

post #210 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

So Google is wasting their time with their Jellybean fixing lag via Butter, which according to you is not needed.

Who is lying, then?

Lying? I don't know but I am not. Probably you did not read me properly. Yes, if you put resource hungry applications, then Galaxy Nexus might lag some as you know it's specs are not top end, not even matched with Galaxy S2. Again, you can optimize it to you requirement. If you want touch experience with less lag like iPhone, then you could do it by customizing Nexus just like iPhone. I think if iOS allows widgets and live wallpapers, iPhone would lag too.
post #211 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post


Lying? I don't know but I am not. Probably you did not read me properly. Yes, if you put resource hungry applications, then Galaxy Nexus might lag some as you know it's specs are not top end, not even matched with Galaxy S2. Again, you can optimize it to you requirement. If you want touch experience with less lag like iPhone, then you could do it by customizing Nexus just like iPhone. I think if iOS allows widgets and live wallpapers, iPhone would lag too.

 

So, you're saying that Android lags because Google made bad engineering choices to allow the OS to get bogged down running non-essential processes and that Apple had good technical reasons for not implementing eye-candy resource hogs? That sounds reasonable.

post #212 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

so true. if there were no android phones you wouldn't have any larger screens, freedom, and for sure apple would have no reason to really improve. thats what got them in trouble long ago. they just kept putting out sh*t, tacking on more and more bloat onto the original mac os. 
apple just sees that they are going to have to spend a lot of money and put major effort into keeping the iphone and ios alive and they dont like that. so they litigate. there are no stupid 'home' buttons on the galaxy nexus, it has a much larger screen and Android 4 is clearly not ios other than you use your fingers to manipulate it. it looks better than the iphone and i am glad i have mine and even if apple succeeded in eliminating android (which ain't going to happen) i still would not get an iphone. 
i can't believe the number of people on here taking a 'microsoft phone is okay, but android needs to go'. just shows how idiotic they are.

Larger screens? Really? That is innovation?
post #213 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmason1270 View Post


Larger screens? Really? That is innovation?

 

Well, urban anthropologists believe that cell phone display has become, especially for certain subsets of male geeks, a ritualized substitute for penile display, so, bigger is better.

 

Of course, as usual, screamingfist presents his usual rambling, incoherent arguments that confuse not only facts but time lines and barely maintain any grip on reality.

post #214 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

Lying? I don't know but I am not. Probably you did not read me properly. Yes, if you put resource hungry applications, then Galaxy Nexus might lag some as you know it's specs are not top end, not even matched with Galaxy S2. Again, you can optimize it to you requirement. If you want touch experience with less lag like iPhone, then you could do it by customizing Nexus just like iPhone. I think if iOS allows widgets and live wallpapers, iPhone would lag too.

Wrong.

GOOGLE, you know the ones who bought Android and released it are the ones who claimed butter, a part of Jellybean is specifically being added to address the lag issue inherent to Android due to it being a JVM with no real time access to the custom Linux kernel upon which it runs.

Even the Galaxy S III has this issue, it's only a few tenths of a second but it sure is noticeable.

Hence Google's continuing efforts to address it.

Stop living in denial, it's an inherent flaw no amount of tweaking stuff will get rid of it.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #215 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

...and there you go. That's the issue with software patents. A company holding the rights may have the honest intent of only protecting their specific innovation in their specific product. Another may have the intent of using vaguely written IP to strongly discourage new entrants and block serious competitors in "their" market, stifling innovation and creative product ideas.

"Wow. those guys really came up with a great idea. Heck of a crew they've got. You have to admire them"
"What they've done has really got me excited about our own product line and has me thinking outside our own box. Take their latest idea"

" While it's a great start, and they should be commended, I don't think they understand where they've limited it. If you begin with what they've done and look at it with (whatever) in mind instead of (whatever) then you could do this. Change the interface to allow (whatever), add the ability to work with the (whatever) as well as tweak the idea that you should be able to (whatever) and you end up with a feature that truly works for a whole range of uses." 

Why should thinking about ways to improve another's ideas be stifled by fears that your bigger richer competitor is going to bring every courtroom attack they can.  How does it help innovation if your competitor can find one interpretation of some previously unknown software IP claim to see that your "better mousetrap" is banished or at least delayed long enough that your innovative improvements in a device that competitor may not be interested in building anyway don't matter anymore?

Why are software patents any different than other patents? You could say exactly the same thing about a patent for a device. A company might write the patent narrowly or broadly - same as with software patents.
"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 #216 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Why are software patents any different than other patents? 

As current US patent law is written it isn't any different. Thus the problems. Do you see any "patent troll" claims for hardware?

 

EDIT: Here's one on my favorite examples. Could anyone build a smartphone without using this company's patent? f they refused to license it, as you would say they have the right to, could every smartphone manufacturer including Apple be guillty of "stealing their IP" and potentially enjoined from selling their product in the US?

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/24/ultra-vague-accelerometer-patent-filed-in-2006-seems-to-cover-ev/

 

Do you have an example of any similarly vague patent for hardware from the past 10 years or so?


Edited by Gatorguy - 7/1/12 at 6:27am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #217 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

So, you're saying that Android lags because Google made bad engineering choices to allow the OS to get bogged down running non-essential processes and that Apple had good technical reasons for not implementing eye-candy resource hogs? That sounds reasonable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Wrong.
GOOGLE, you know the ones who bought Android and released it are the ones who claimed butter, a part of Jellybean is specifically being added to address the lag issue inherent to Android due to it being a JVM with no real time access to the custom Linux kernel upon which it runs.
Even the Galaxy S III has this issue, it's only a few tenths of a second but it sure is noticeable.
Hence Google's continuing efforts to address it.
Stop living in denial, it's an inherent flaw no amount of tweaking stuff will get rid of it.

Don't be mad, I am not suggesting anything about Google. You just keep reading me wrong. My Galaxy Nexus does not lag.

BTW, what was I wrong about?
post #218 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post
Why should thinking about ways to improve another's ideas be stifled by fears that your bigger richer competitor is going to bring every courtroom attack they can.  How does it help innovation if your competitor can find one interpretation of some previously unknown software IP claim to see that your "better mousetrap" is banished or at least delayed long enough that your innovative improvements in a device that competitor may not be interested in building anyway don't matter anymore?

 

Oh, I see he's edited...

 

While it's admirable the gallant attempts he makes to pretend that Google is just trying to make things better, the underlying truth is that, with Android, Google, with intent to do so, engaged in a wholesale ripoff of the entire design of the iPhone and iOS. (Just as, up until the day the iPhone was announced, they were engaged in creating a wholesale ripoff of the Blackberry.)

 

Let's be clear, this isn't innovation. This is no different than "knockoff" fashions where they use pictures from fashion shows to knock off the latest designer styles. This represents zero innovation, just the process of creating cheap copies of designs stolen from someone else. Google isn't innovating anything with Android. They are simply knocking off the design of the iPhone.

 

This is what the suits are about: The utter lack of innovation and the blatant copying.

 

You may hate Windows Phone 7's UI, but at least it was innovative. There is absolutely nothing innovative about the design and implementation of Android phones. By suing to protect their IP, Apple isn't stifling innovation, they are defending it. Defending it from the robbers and thieves we know as Google.

post #219 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post


Don't be mad, I am not suggesting anything about Google. You just keep reading me wrong. My Galaxy Nexus does not lag.
BTW, what was I wrong about?


 You weren't wrong, you said your Android phone lags because of widgets and wallpapers, which is probably true, among other reasons. Now you're contradicting yourself, though, so it's the old, where you wrong then or are you wrong now....

post #220 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wovel View Post

I gave you a very, very clear case.  You simply chose to ignore it because it does not fit your world view.  So Motorola suing Apple as a Google subsidary really does not count to you?  That just makes you delusional.  Stop fighting for a cause you already lost.

 

The litigation was not active when the acquisition started, it did not even start until January 2012.  Do you really think that litigation was initiated without Google's knowledge?  Show me where someone from Motorola was fired for doing that.  Have you ever been involved in an acquisition? Things like that simply do not happen.  The January lawsuit was a Google lawsuit.

Google did not own Motorola in January of 2012 and it wasn't any "subsidiary".. Guessing that Google must have told Moto to sue Apple is just that. . . a guess. Assuming that Google had control over that particular case is just a guess. Projecting that Google 100% approved of all Moto's legal efforts is just a guess. When you find where Google has filed suit against a competitor as a fact then post it and I'll acknowledge it.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #221 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmason1270 View Post


Larger screens? Really? That is innovation?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

 

Well, urban anthropologists believe that cell phone display has become, especially for certain subsets of male geeks, a ritualized substitute for penile display, so, bigger is better.

 

Of course, as usual, screamingfist presents his usual rambling, incoherent arguments that confuse not only facts but time lines and barely maintain any grip on reality.

 

So, by "extension", bigger dicks are an innovation too? Of course, one would say the process of trying to innovate is a form of dicking around.


Edited by ankleskater - 7/1/12 at 8:22am
post #222 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Google did not own Motorola in January of 2012 and it wasn't any "subsidiary".. Guessing that Google must have told Moto to sue Apple is just that. . . a guess. Assuming that Google had control over that particular case is just a guess. Projecting that Google 100% approved of all Moto's legal efforts is just a guess. When you find where Google has filed suit against a competitor as a fact then post it and I'll acknowledge it.


I agree that this distinction is proper. The question is, will Google discontinue legal proceedings now that Moto is indeed under its proper control? If not, then it would be guilty of hypocrisy.

post #223 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post


I agree that this distinction is proper. The question is, will Google discontinue legal proceedings now that Moto is indeed under its proper control? If not, then it would be guilty of hypocrisy.

I would imagine they'll let anything already underway when they took over play out. Apple and Microsoft also have claims against Moto in those same cases that they show no inclination of dropping.

 

As for filing new lawsuits neither Google being reluctant to, nor Google feeling they have no choice but to would surprise me. If 6 months from now Google still hasn't initiated any action against it's tech community competitors than it should be pretty a pretty good indication what their attitude towards using the courts for competitive advantage is.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #224 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Google did not own Motorola in January of 2012 and it wasn't any "subsidiary"..

You are technically correct. There is no denying that, but the merger was approved months before and I know that the dominate company does oversee actions between the time of approval and finalization. The point to make sure the company doesn't do anything to shoot itself in the foot. This is even without considering the strategic maneuvering of suing one company after you control another company but before the deal is official thus creating a barrier between you and the company being sued. Regardless of whether you want to believe it or not — again, you are technically correct — but Google controlled this suit against Apple. Don't deny Google their credit for being clever and shrewd.


PS: If you still want to say it's a guess that Google had any influence because they didn't officially own MM at that point then you'd have to say that Apple getting Disney's umbrella of studios on onboard with the iTS first had nothing to do with influence coming from Apple because Apple doesn't officially own Disney. See the dilemma with thinking? You know damn well that Steve Job was a board member at Disney and largest shareholder, and CEO of Apple without allowed for a great deal of pull that otherwise would have been more difficult if not for the excessively large $$$ connecting the two.

"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 #225 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


 You weren't wrong, you said your Android phone lags because of widgets and wallpapers, which is probably true, among other reasons. Now you're contradicting yourself, though, so it's the old, where you wrong then or are you wrong now....


I disagree. The reason for UI lag in Android is rooted in its low level architecture. In iOS, UI handling is given its own dedicated thread given real-time interrupt handling (i.e. higher priority than other threads). Therefore, when you touch the screen, response is instantaneous even if screen rendering is not complete. In Android, UI handling does not have its own thread and is not given highest priority. The OS multitasks handling of your touches with other tasks, thus creating the lag. This has improved with multicore processors but it will never be as smooth as in iOS unless Google is willing to change the architecture. But changing it means turning the ground over under existing apps. In a way, this may be clear evidence that multitouch was an added feature, an afterthought, and not part of fundamental design of Android.

post #226 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


You are technically correct. There is no denying that, but the merger was approved months before and I know that the dominate company does oversee actions between the time of approval and finalization. The point to make sure the company doesn't do anything to shoot itself in the foot. This is even without considering the strategic maneuvering of suing one company after you control another company but before the deal is official thus creating a barrier between you and the company being sued. Regardless of whether you want to believe it or not — again, you are technically correct — but Google controlled this suit against Apple. Don't deny Google their credit for being clever and shrewd.
PS: If you still want to say it's a guess that Google had any influence because they didn't officially own MM at that point then you'd have to say that Apple getting Disney's umbrella of studios on onboard with the iTS first had nothing to do with influence coming from Apple because Apple doesn't officially own Disney. See the dilemma with thinking? You know damn well that Steve Job was a board member at Disney and largest shareholder, and CEO of Apple without allowed for a great deal of pull that otherwise would have been more difficult if not for the excessively large $$$ connecting the two.

I wouldn't at all deny that Steve Jobs had influence at Disney.That would be silly. He certainly didn't call the shots tho even as a director of the company. Disney hasn't always seen fit to comply with Apple wishes. Why would you feel that conflicts with my thoughts on this? I don't know that I ever had comments on Disney and Apple.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #227 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post


 But changing it means turning the ground over under existing apps. In a way, this may be clear evidence that multitouch was an added feature, an afterthought, and not part of fundamental design of Android.

IIRC, Google engineers acknowledged that sometime back. They were more about allowing the user to do more than one thing at a time.  Initial coding for Android didn't prioritize for touchscreen response, with the obvious need for it coming later. Apple on the other hand planned the iPhone around touch control from the beginning.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #228 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I would imagine they'll let anything already underway when they took over play out. Apple and Microsoft also have claims against Moto in those same cases that they show no inclination of dropping.

 

As for filing new lawsuits neither Google being reluctant to, nor Google feeling they have no choice but to would surprise me. If 6 months from now Google still hasn't initiated any action against it's tech community competitors than it should be pretty a pretty good indication what their attitude towards using the courts for competitive advantage is.


I don't harbor the notion is Google is fundamentally evil. I believe that Page and Brin are brilliant computer scientists. At the same time, I think allowing a Motorola lawsuit to play out is stretching the principle of not initiating litigation. It's like an NFL team saying it does not condone steroid use but will sign a free agent known to be a user, and not ask him to stop.

post #229 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I wouldn't at all deny that Steve Jobs had influence at Disney.That would be silly. He certainly didn't call the shots tho even as a director of the company. Disney hasn't always seen fit to comply with Apple wishes. Why would you feel that conflicts with my thoughts on this? I don't know that I ever had comments on Disney and Apple.


With Jobs being a huge fan of Walt Disney (the man, not the company), I'd have loved to see him live long enough to change the Disney company. Unfortunately, that did not happen. Judging from Cars II and Brave, not to mention re-release of Finding Nemo in 3D, I am concerned that Disney has changed Pixar rather than the other way around.

 

On the other hand, Disney has been more supportive of iTunes than most (all?) other studios. Will this continue without Jobs? Hopefully, with Disney's CEO being an Apple director.


Edited by ankleskater - 7/1/12 at 7:58am
post #230 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post


I don't harbor the notion is Google is fundamentally evil. I believe that Page and Brin are brilliant computer scientists. At the same time, I think allowing a Motorola lawsuit to play out is stretching the principle of not initiating litigation. It's like an NFL team saying it does not condone steroid use but will sign a free agent known to be a user, and not ask him to stop.

Not really an accurate comparison but I understand the point you're trying to make. I think the best approach myself would be to publicly announce that if Apple and Microsoft will also waive their competing actions against Motorola then Google is prepared to drop theirs, even those not FRAND-pledged (They're not all essential patents). Does that sound reasonable, then everyone can get back to work?

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #231 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Why would you feel that conflicts with my thoughts on this? I don't know that I ever had comments on Disney and Apple.

What conflicts is you suggesting that one has influence and the other doesn't. You say it's just a guess that Google had influence over MM months after the merger was accepted but you automatically accept as canon that Apple had influence over Disney through Jobs. The latter is considerably less direct on paper and yet you accept this without question even though Apple doesn't technically own Disney in any way, shape, or form. That's the conflict! You are standing by a technicality on the former without looking at the reality of it like you are with the latter.

"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 #232 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

As current US patent law is written it isn't any different. Thus the problems. Do you see any "patent troll" claims for hardware?

EDIT: Here's one on my favorite examples. Could anyone build a smartphone without using this company's patent? f they refused to license it, as you would say they have the right to, could every smartphone manufacturer including Apple be guillty of "stealing their IP" and potentially enjoined from selling their product in the US?
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/24/ultra-vague-accelerometer-patent-filed-in-2006-seems-to-cover-ev/

Do you have an example of any similarly vague patent for hardware from the past 10 years or so?

Sure. I've seen it in my own job in the past.

It's not as common with hardware patents, but it happens. They really simply need to hire some software engineers as patent examiners.
"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 #233 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Not really an accurate comparison but I understand the point you're trying to make. I think the best approach myself would be to publicly announce that if Apple and Microsoft will also waive their competing actions against Motorola then Google is prepared to drop theirs, even those not FRAND-pledged (They're not all essential patents). Does that sound reasonable, then everyone can get back to work?

Of course you'd suggest something like that-but it's absurd. Apple has led the industry in innovation and has a mountain of useful patents. Motorola's (and, now, Google's) patents are mostly FRAND and the ones which aren't FRAND are not particularly useful.

Your scheme would allow them to continue copying Apple products with impunity. Exactly what Google would love.
"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 #234 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


What conflicts is you suggesting that one has influence and the other doesn't. You say it's just a guess that Google had influence over MM months after the merger was accepted but you automatically accept as canon that Apple had influence over Disney through Jobs. The latter is considerably less direct on paper and yet you accept this without question even though Apple doesn't technically own Disney in any way, shape, or form. That's the conflict! You are standing by a technicality on the former without looking at the reality of it like you are with the latter.

Soli, I never said that Google had no influence with Moto. That would be just as silly as claiming that Apple had no influence at Disney. What I said it was just was guessing to claim that Google had control over Moto's legal cases. Where's the conflict?

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #235 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Sure. I've seen it in my own job in the past.
It's not as common with hardware patents, but it happens. They really simply need to hire some software engineers as patent examiners.

Example?

 

FWIW, the patent system itself is set up to assume a patent application is valid. The examiner is required to submit a written statement explaining a denial and the detailed specific reasons for it. The approval just needs a stamp AFAIK, no statements why needed. If you've got a pile of 'em on your desk and pressure to clear the backlog, which they do, those difficult to understand software patents with dozens of claims are pretty likely to get the stamp of approval barring anything plainly obvious. Would you agree?

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #236 of 368
The news keeps getting worse for Samsung.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/07/judge-koh-deals-next-blow-to-samsung.html
Quote:
On Saturday, Judge Koh denied the entirety of a comprehensive summary judgment motion that Samsung brought in May. Samsung attacked the validity of each and every one of the intellectual property rights asserted by Apple at this stage as well as Apple's FRAND-related antitrust claims, and failed all the way. It is very unusual for such a multi-pronged motion by a major industry player to fail entirely.

Then, later:
Quote:
This presumably concludes a dreadful week for Samsung in the Northern District of California, which previously involved a preliminary injunction against the Galaxy Tab 10.1, a far more important preliminary injunction against the Galaxy Nexus, the dismissal of one of Samsung's patent infringement claims further to Apple's summary judgment motion, and a clear Apple victory over expert reports.

I just can't wait to hear Gatorguy and Jerrytroll tell us how this is a great victory and how Samsung will win in the end.
"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 #237 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Soli, I never said that Google had no influence with Moto. That would be just as silly as claiming that Apple had no influence at Disney. What I said it was just was guessing to claim that Google had control over Moto's legal cases. Where's the conflict?

All influence is control. Control does not necessarily — and usually doesn't — mean it's absolute and unmitigated. Again, the words you stated previously are technically correct, but they are not the complete truth, hence the MM lawsuit from January still falls under the Google umbrella even if Google technically, on paper, hadn't actually merged with MM at that point.

"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 #238 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


All influence is control. Control does not necessarily — and usually doesn't — mean it's absolute and unmitigated. Again, the words you stated previously are technically correct, but they are not the complete truth, hence the MM lawsuit from January still falls under the Google umbrella even if Google technically, on paper, hadn't actually merged with MM at that point.

I disagree Soli. You would then argue that Disney's actions were controlled by Apple? Or that the actions of some company that Apple (or MS or Nokia) gives IP to were controlled by Apple when that IP is used for infringement claims. ;)

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #239 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

The news keeps getting worse for Samsung.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/07/judge-koh-deals-next-blow-to-samsung.html
I just can't wait to hear Gatorguy and Jerrytroll tell us how this is a great victory and how Samsung will win in the end.

Regardless of what Samsung loses in court I still think that Samsung, from a purely business standpoint, made the best moves of all the Android-based vendors as I highly doubt that any penalties they will face will be so bad as to account for all the revenue, profit, and Android-based mindshare they've had. I also think they've used their thievery to actually learn how to make a better product at a lower cost which is something that other Android-based vendors still can't seem to match. From a business perspective the ends look to be justifying the means.

"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 #240 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

You would then argue that Disney's actions could be blamed on Apple? Or that the actions of some company that Apple (or MS or Nokia) gives IP to could be blamed on Apple when that IP is used for infringement claims. 1wink.gif

Define blame. A simply assigning of responsibility outside a court of law? Sure, I think Jobs as a Disney board member and largest shareholder, and CEO of Apple fought to get Disney-owned content on the ITS to help grow the store and influence other content owners to follow suit. Can I prove it? Absolutely not but you and I both know it's damn well true.


PS: These forums discussions are all about control. I am trying to use my words to influence you to my PoV just as you are doing the same to me. There is nothing malevolent about it. This is how communication works. I often disagree with your points just as you mine but you do create intelligent and well thoughtout counter-arguments which forces me to use more thorough arguments (oft requiring research) to counter your arguments. You influence me. I influence you. I'd be lying if I said this forum and it's members (most of them) has not taught me to be a better debater. It's still my choice to engage but the words of others on here have controlled nearly all my responses. It's a good thing!
Edited by SolipsismX - 7/1/12 at 8:29am

"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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple wins injunction against Samsung Galaxy Nexus smartphone