or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple's Ive describes struggle for perfection in interview, calls copycat designs 'theft'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's Ive describes struggle for perfection in interview, calls copycat designs 'theft' - Page 3

post #81 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Heh heh... classic GG response: deflect the question, meander, and obfuscate.

freediverx, we all know you got the answer to your question!

Anant, you're more than welcome to offer your opinion on what I asked. I think it's quite discussion-worthy, particularly since the iPhone has been found to infringe on patents belonging to other companies who would have been well within their rights to ask that the product be banned rather than agree to license their IP. That Samsung wasn't that company owning those patents doesn't matter.

I suspect both you and the OP are artificially limiting the argument so as to avoid offering your own opinions on a very valid question.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #82 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by SudoNym View Post
 

Sony was once worth nearly $150.  Now it is worth less than $20.  I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that Sony is doing well.


I'm referring to the their mobile devices innovation as of late. Their high end models seem to resonate well from a quality/design perspective and the compact versions of them aren't just smaller devices with cheaper components but actual smaller versions with the same components (*what* a concept right?). This seem to work for the Swedish market at least where they are pushing out several much cheaper Samsung Galaxys from the operators top selling lists at the moment...

post #83 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Anant, you're more than welcome to offer your opinion on what I asked. I think it's quite discussion-worthy, particularly since the iPhone has been found to infringe on patents belonging to other companies who would have been well within their rights to ask that the product be banned rather than agree to license their IP. That Samsung wasn't that company owning those patents doesn't matter.

I suspect both you and the OP are artificially limiting the argument so as to avoid offering your own opinions on a very valid question.

Er... his question was a very simple one. I'll repeat it. He asked: "Can you cite any court cases where Apple was found to violate a Samsung patent?"

 

Can you? If you can't, say 'no, I can't.'

 

The rest is bs.

post #84 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Er... his question was a very simple one. I'll repeat it. He asked: "Can you cite any court cases where Apple was found to violate a Samsung patent?"

Can you? If you can't, say 'no, I can't.' Otherwise, please cite.

The rest is bs.

Why only Samsung? Thats a simple question too, as is your obvious avoidance of offering an opinion but still getting involved in the discussion.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #85 of 141
post #86 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Why only Samsung? Thats a simple question too, as is your obvious avoidance of offering an opinion but still getting involved in the discussion.

 

Not once have I seen you give a straight aswer to a straight question. A straight answer would be "No, sorry, I cannot, even though I've implied as much strongly in all my previous posts". It's not that hard. 

 

Instead, it's the never-ending "Why did you ask me that question? I prefer another question that more suits my agenda, so I won't answer, and instead make further baseless insinuations". 

post #87 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Why only Samsung? Thats a simple question too, as is your obvious avoidance of offering an opinion but still getting involved in the discussion.

I am just pointing out -- especially to those who have not been in the forum for too long -- that your classic MO as a poster is to redefine the premise of the questioner to suit your agenda. That's all.

 

I personally have little or no interest in his (or your) question.

post #88 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I am just pointing out -- especially to those who have not been in the forum for too long -- that your classic MO as a poster is to redefine the premise of the questioner to suit your agenda. That's all.

I personally have little or no interest in his (or your) question.

Well since his comments were prompted by this post:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/165514/apples-ive-describes-struggle-for-perfection-in-interview-calls-copycat-designs-theft#post_2489267
if there's any classic "redefining the discussion" going on it would be on his part and not mine sir. Again, you're quite welcome to take part. I would honestly like to know your opinion on whether you believe a products already licensing umpteen thousand patents should be barred from the market if they might be infringing on one or two.

If you don't have an opinion then fair enough. Freediverx apparently does and I'm trying to figure out what it is.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #89 of 141

Just finished the interview, great quotes from Ive, but of course the author can't resist throwing in this cliched shittiness:

 

Quote:
 Ive describes Jobs as “my closest friend” and says he finds it “odd and tough to talk about him, because it doesn’t feel that long ago that he died.” There is, perhaps, another reason. Since Jobs died, Apple has hit a rough patch, at least by its ludicrously high standards. It has not had a break-out hit. There has been no Apple TV set to revolutionize home entertainment. No spiffy watch. (Yet.) The firm’s share price has slumped and it has lost its title of the world’s most valuable firm. Some speculate that, without Jobs, Apple has lost its golden touch. An acclaimed new book by the former Wall Street Journal technology writer Yukari Iwatani Kane dubs the company “the haunted empire.” 

 

Yeah, having every new product smash the records of the previous, and smashing sales, revenue, and profit records pretty much every quarter indeed qualifies as a "rough patch". And I guess a product such as the 5S, which is pretty much the most successful smartphone in history sales-wise, with 5 million in the 1st weekend, doesn't quality as a "break-out hit". Neither does the iPad Air, apparently, which could very well be the best reviewed consumer tech product in history, and has had ridiculously high sales. Nope, not a "break-out" hit either. Cause that would contradict the "Apple in a slump" agenda. There isn't a shred of an indication that Apple has lost its "golden touch", whatever the hell that means.  Quite the standards this interviewer has. I'd like to see a company or product he considers a success. I'm geting tired of this intellectual laziness, and people in the media mindlessly repeating a narrative that is not supported by any kind of empirical evidence. 

post #90 of 141

It's easy to think that Ive's comments about "giving a damn" are meant to imply that other companies and designers don't give a damn. But while that could be true in many cases, I don't think that's his point. I think between the lines is the subtle point that Apple obsesses over producing products that actually communicate their care, or in some cases, obsesses over getting out of the way of a product's essence doing the communicating. Just because a group may care about the quality of their work, doesn't mean they'll know how to actually conceive, design, create, test, redesign, polish, and ultimately mass-produce something that equally reflects their passion and care. Thus his comment that Apple's success is a "victory for...giving a damn". Many people believe in those principles, few have actually brought them into reality and profitability. 

post #91 of 141

This is the new Apple that priorizes design versus functionality and progressively downgrades the appliations and hardware functionality:

 

SOFTWARE
- Missing scroll arrows.
- Missing scrolls.
- Missing color labels.
- Missing left pane colors.
- Missing resume playback on iTunes.
- Missing editing QuickTime Player features.
- Missing editing iMovie features.
- Missing electronic signatures via certificates.
- Missing folders to sort Application-side of Dock.
- Missing feature to prevent disk mounting at startup.
- Missing convenient Finder search engine like in Mac OS 9 (Sherlock).
- Etc.

 

HARDWARE
- Missing light pocketable Mac for Keynote and PowerPoint presentations.
- Missing disk activity light on Macs.
- Missing power-on key on keyboard.
- Missing frontal ports on Mac.
- Missing numeric keyboard with USB 3 hub.
- Missing true matte displays.
- Missing 3D displays and 3D playback.
- Missing Full Picture-in-Picture (two Digital Terrestrial Television tuners inside)
- Missing Blu-ray playback.
- Missing Thunderbolt 2 Display 4K with USB 3
- Etc.

 

What a shame, Apple - If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

DO NOT GET ME WRONG - I LOVE THE MAC, BUT IT COULD BE MUCH BETTER!!!

post #92 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

Not once have I seen you give a straight aswer to a straight question. A straight answer would be "No, sorry, I cannot, even though I've implied as much strongly in all my previous posts". It's not that hard. 

Instead, it's the never-ending "Why did you ask me that question? I prefer another question that more suits my agenda, so I won't answer, and instead make further baseless insinuations". 

I can find several instances of Apple being found to infringe on patents that are not FRAND-pledged. I can't find one where the owner of that patent was Samsung. In what way does that change the discussion and further why would it matter it was Samsung or instead someone else? The OP is the only one who can answer what his point was and he seems to have gone silent on the subject.

Since you seem to have an interest what's your opinion on whether infringement of one or two patents should warrant barring a product from the market that otherwise licenses thousands of others? Any opinion at all?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #93 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppeX View Post

This is the new Apple that priorizes design versus functionality and progressively downgrades the appliations and hardware functionality:

SOFTWARE

- Missing scroll arrows.
[…]

You lost me at missing scroll arrows. I'm guessing you don't like the corrected (you probably see it as reversed) scrolling introduced in Lion.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply
post #94 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppeX View Post

This is the new Apple that priorizes design versus functionality and progressively downgrades the appliations and hardware functionality:

SOFTWARE

- Missing scroll arrows.

- Missing scrolls.

- Missing color labels.

- Missing left pane colors.

- Missing resume playback on iTunes.

- Missing editing QuickTime Player features.

- Missing editing iMovie features.

- Missing electronic signatures via certificates.

- Missing folders to sort Application-side of Dock.

- Missing feature to prevent disk mounting at startup.

- Missing convenient Finder search engine like in Mac OS 9 (Sherlock).

- Etc.

HARDWARE

- Missing light pocketable Mac for Keynote and PowerPoint presentations.

- Missing disk activity light on Macs.

- Missing power-on key on keyboard.

- Missing frontal ports on Mac.

- Missing numeric keyboard with USB 3 hub.

- Missing true matte displays.

- Missing 3D displays and 3D playback.

- Missing Full Picture-in-Picture (two Digital Terrestrial Television tuners inside)

- Missing Blu-ray playback.

- Missing Thunderbolt 2 Display 4K with USB 3

- Etc.

What a shame, Apple - If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
DO NOT GET ME WRONG - I LOVE THE MAC, BUT IT COULD BE MUCH BETTER!!!

Thus is a joke post, right? Don't forget missing one-cup coffee maker with usb3 ports + Bluray playback.
post #95 of 141
Originally Posted by AppeX View Post

- Missing scroll arrows.

 

Not needed. That’s why they’re not there.

 
- Missing scrolls.


And this means what?

 
- Missing color labels.
- Missing resume playback on iTunes.
- Missing editing QuickTime Player features.
- Missing editing iMovie features.

 

Never happened, ever.

 
- Missing left pane colors.
- Missing true matte displays.

 

Get over it.

 
- Missing electronic signatures via certificates.

 

I’m pretty sure this has never happened.

 
- Missing folders to sort Application-side of Dock.

 

You don’t comprehend the Dock.

 
- Missing feature to prevent disk mounting at startup.

 

What, optical discs?

 
 - Missing convenient Finder search engine like in Mac OS 9 (Sherlock).

 

Yeah, your completely subjective nonsense that ignores Spotlight sure is “missing”¡

 
- Missing light pocketable Mac for Keynote and PowerPoint presentations.

 

Your refusal to accept existing solutions ≠ missing.

 
- Missing disk activity light on Macs.


You’re completely insane. Why would this have EVER been something that anyone would want, and now that there aren’t any moving parts to the disks, why would anyone ever want it again?

 
- Missing power-on key on keyboard.
- Missing frontal ports on Mac.
- Missing numeric keyboard with USB 3 hub.

 

You don’t get Apple.

 
- Missing 3D displays and 3D playback.
- Missing Blu-ray playback.
- Missing Full Picture-in-Picture (two Digital Terrestrial Television tuners inside)

 

Apple doesn’t do gimmicks.

 
- Missing Thunderbolt 2 Display 4K with USB 3

 

“It isn’t out yet” = “missing” these days? Good for you.

 
DO NOT GET ME WRONG - I LOVE THE MAC, BUT

 

Just shut up.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #96 of 141

I love Apple's design.  But sometimes they went over too much emphasizing design over endurance.  My mbp charger was so flimsy.  I think it was designed to break when it's more than a year old.  I'm on my third one starting last week.

post #97 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by ipen View Post

I love Apple's design.  But sometimes they went over too much emphasizing design over endurance.  My mbp charger was so flimsy.  I think it was designed to break when it's more than a year old.  I'm on my third one starting last week.

I don't doubt you're on your third one but it seems that Apple does care about the bit that you can't see: http://www.righto.com/2012/05/apple-iphone-charger-teardown-quality.html

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply
post #98 of 141

Sony seems to be the only one of the direct competitors that have the capacity to understand this *and* execute on it?

 

Really?  So I take it you have never heard of  a little company called HTC?  Which has be alluded for years for it's design and build quality and over all user experience.  And even more so with the release of the HTC One which was awarded by several outlets smartphone of the year last year, GSMA to name just one.

 

So to say only Sony ha the capacity to understand and execute this is bs.  Do some actually research.

post #99 of 141

The HTC One is only not a copy because they had a license?

 

HTC One is not a copy because it looks and acts nothing like an iPhone.  The only thing they have similar to each other is they are both metal and have a touchscreen.  Other than that.  Nothing.   HTC One is still a superior device.  The iPhone is great but not as great as the One.

post #100 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

But the world doesn’t. “Good enough” is the standard. It’s why Windows dominates the desktop OS universe. It’s why Android is on all of the cheap phones. It’s why textiles, electronics, steel, moved to China. 

This just kills me. I'm 54 and there was a time when buying American made products was common. These products lasted for years and quality control was top priority. Then everything went outsourced to other countries like China. It's not that these countries can't make long lasting products, it's that the corporations don't care anymore and only want cheap with the highest profits.
So many of the well made products of the past still have the same names but are now garbage and break in a short amount of time. People don't understand why I still buy the well made products when I could just buy another cheap one when one of those breaks. I would probably save money but I just depise having to deal with failure and all the headaches and lost time that goes with it.
That is one reason I bought my first Mac in the mid 80s and never looked back.
post #101 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post
 

 

But the world doesn’t. “Good enough” is the standard. It’s why Windows dominates the desktop OS universe. It’s why Android is on all of the cheap phones. It’s why textiles, electronics, steel, moved to China. 

Ignorant comment.

post #102 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTC4LIFE View Post

The only people being accused of stealing hardware designs an UI designs from Apple are third party OEMS like Samsung.  Not Google.

Steve Jobs said Android is a stolen product. How is that not an accusation?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply
post #103 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

Honest questions: are there any phones being sold since 2012 that look even remotely similar with the iPhone or iPad?

*facepalm*

 

ONLY EVERY FREAKIN' PHONE AFTER 2007

post #104 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by cali View Post
 

*facepalm*

 

ONLY EVERY FREAKIN' PHONE AFTER 2007

And every TV looks the same so should Sony sue LG Emerson and Samsung?

 

Every car looks the same should Ford sue since they were the first to make cars?  

post #105 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Steve Jobs said Android is a stolen product. How is that not an accusation?

Because Steve Jobs didn't know what he was talking about.  And he had no problem with Android until they became dominate.  Those are the facts.  When Android first came to the scene he welcomed it.

post #106 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTC4LIFE View Post

Because Steve Jobs didn't know what he was talking about.  And he had no problem with Android until they became dominate.  Those are the facts.  When Android first came to the scene he welcomed it.

1) Do you have any proof that Android was "dominate" in 2009 when Schmidt was forced to step down from Apple's board or in 2008 when Schdmit's role on the board was being minimized?

2) Really?! Steve Jobs didn't know what he's talking about? His many successes in life over 4 decades and multiple product categories and companies were all just dumb luck?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply
post #107 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Motorola, Ericsson and Nokia have been making mobile phones for a long time, so by the same token it would be silly to think a newcomer like Apple can ship smartphones without violating some Motorola or Nokia or Ericsson patent pertaining to mobile phones. Wouldn't that be right? IMO all the manufacturers benefit from innovations and inventions that might have originated with a competitor.

If you believe an infringed patent should be sufficient for a product to be banned from the market if the holder doesn't want to licence it then no current smartphone could probably be sold IMHO.

Your last sentence is true EXCEPT for patents that are necessary to patent to participate in a market. For example, any patent that must be used to make a functional cell phone operational on a public system. These patents must be licensed and fall under that rules of FRAND. However, Apple patent that makes a list "bounce" when it scrolls to the end is part of trade dress and not required to scroll a list, therefore is not required to scroll a list, and Apple can refuse to license it to another company. This is one of the patents Samsung copied that is not essential and they do not want to pay Apple to use... see the diff??
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #108 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTC4LIFE View Post

And every TV looks the same so should Sony sue LG Emerson and Samsung?

Every car looks the same should Ford sue since they were the first to make cars?  

Your example fails. Every car and TV have details or style elements that set them apart. If they all look the same to you it is because you have no taste and can not discern quality or details. What does make SOME TVs look the same is that SOME brands have a few other companies manufacture products for them and do not specify unique details for their brands. So, TVs, refrigerators and washers and dryers roll out the back door of Samsung in boxes marked with different brands on them. In addition, Samsung has been slavishly copying appliances made my other companies for decades... they didn't just start with iPhones. That unbridled copying of products has led to Samsung products being confused with other products, but that doesn't mean it was right since the original designer did not sue for economic reasons. This is why Samsung is so determined to not pay Apple for stealing Apple's designs, it sets a precedent that will affect Samsung out into the future in all kinds of markets other than phones.
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #109 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by freediverx View Post
 

 

That's what Standard Essential Patents are for. Samsung abused these by trying to use them as leverage to force Apple to license their bread and butter patents which were never part of the SEP agreements.

 

@freediverx: that's totally false. According to last ITC ruling (the Commission Opinion) p.60-p.61:

 

"...

Apple also criticizes Samsung's attempt to negotiate a cross-license of both parties' mobile telephone patent portfolios. We cannot say that Samsung's offers in this regard are unreasonable. The record contains evidence ofmore than 30 Samsung licenses that cover the '348 and '644 patents. See RX-173C, RX-178C, RX-188, RX-189C, RX-191C, RX-193C to -209C, RX-421C, RX-423C. All ofthose licenses include a cross-license to the licensee's portfolio. That evidence supports a conclusion a portfolio cross-license offer is typical in the industry and reasonable. 

Apple has offered no evidence to suggest that such portfolio cross-licenses are atypical in the industry. 19 In fact, Apple's own witness on ETSI policies affirmed that ETSI anticipates cross-licensing may be part of the process of negotiating a FRAND license between two parties. Additionally, the negotiating history recounted above shows that Apple has made cross-license offers to Samsung. We also note that commentators have stated that an offer to cross-license both parties' patents may be consistent with a FRAND obligation, for example:
The obligation to make a FRAND offer does not prevent the standard-essential patent owner from entering into an alternative licensing arrangement, such as a portfolio cross license, with an implementer of the standard. It will often make sense for private parties to enter into a deal that reflects their specific circumstances. 

*** 

[A] FRAND offer to a party that owns standard-essential patents can be made conditional on the would-be licensee itselfmaking a reciprocal FRAND offer. 

Lemley, Mark A. and Shapiro, Carl, A Simple Approach to Setting Reasonable Royaltiesfor Standard-Essential Patents Stanford Public Law Working Paper No. 2243026, 5-6, 17 (March 30, 2013), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2243026. That approach appears consistent with the expectations ofETSI, as has been explained on the record in this investigation. See Tr. at 1443 (Walker). Moreover, the ETSI declarations Samsung executed specifically contemplate that a FRAND license will invoive "terms and conditions," not just a royalty rate. See RX-723. 

 

..."

 

Apple was never forced to cross-license their patents, they asked for unilateral FRAN license.  Apple refused to cross-license; yet they demanded a rate that enjoyed by Samsung's cross-licensees.

post #110 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Detox View Post

IMO the only other company making a genuine effort to innovate on its own is probably BlackBerry.

How's that working out for them?
Quote:
For this reason, if I were ever to move from iPhone my choice would probably be BlackBerry.

They won't be around long enough for that possibility.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #111 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by freediverx View Post
 

 

Dyson resoundingly won a court case in the UK over Samsung's attempt to patent "triple-cyclone technology" that Dyson invented.

 

"Britain's High Court upheld Dyson's principal claims that it had already invented and patented the system." Dyson was successful in entirely invalidating one patent and successfully attacking part of another. Samsung was ordered to pay US $852,600.

 

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2009/02/13/dysontechnology-idUKLD64172920090213

 

You're confusing this with a separate case where the issue was the steering mechanism in a vacuum cleaner Samsung introduced at a Berlin consumer electronics show last summer. Dyson declared it a rip-off of a patented feature in their DC cylinder vacuums. Samsung had documentation to show it had been working its steering mechanism for more than a year, so the Dyson suit was dismissed. Now Samsung - a company with a clear track record of copying products - is so insulted that they're suing Dyson for the accusation. 

 

First, Dyson's lawsuit is akin to Google/Samsung requesting USPTO to review and invalidate the multitouch screen patent a couple of years ago -- that was not an infringement case. 

 

Second, " Now Samsung - a company with a clear track record of copying products - is so insulted that they're suing Dyson for the accusation."  Sure, why not?  Apple gets away with it all the time.   Take this excerpt from Jonathan Schwartz, former CEO of Sun Micro (http://jonathanischwartz.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/good-artists-copy-great-artists-steal/):

 

"I feel for Google – Steve Jobs threatened to sue me, too.  In 2003, after I unveiled a prototype Linux desktop called Project Looking Glass*, Steve called my office to let me know the graphical effects were “stepping all over Apple’s IP.” (IP = Intellectual Property = patents, trademarks and copyrights.) If we moved forward to commercialize it, “I’ll just sue you.”

My response was simple. “Steve, I was just watching your last presentation, and Keynote looks identical to Concurrence – do you own that IP?” Concurrence was a presentation product built by Lighthouse Design, a company I’d help to found and which Sun acquired in 1996. Lighthouse built applications for NeXTSTEP, the Unix based operating system whose core would become the foundation for all Mac products after Apple acquired NeXT in 1996. Steve had used Concurrence for years, and as Apple built their own presentation tool, it was obvious where they’d found inspiration. “And last I checked, MacOS is now built on Unix. I think Sun has a few OS patents, too.” Steve was silent."

This is one of the main reasons why I can't support Apple's legal strategy -- it's all based on delusion that everything they are doing is original  and Apple accuses everyone else of copying, even as they shamelessly copy .

post #112 of 141
Honestly, Apple does indeed often gives an insane level of detail to its products.

But there are departments of Apple that also show insane levels of neglect, especially in software. Example: try using a modern Mac with mobile accounts (portable home directories) and run into software that is bug-ridden and that has been neglected for years and years. There, they just don't give a damn.
post #113 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


1) Do you have any proof that Android was "dominate" in 2009 when Schmidt was forced to step down from Apple's board or in 2008 when Schdmit's role on the board was being minimized?

2) Really?! Steve Jobs didn't know what he's talking about? His many successes in life over 4 decades and multiple product categories and companies were all just dumb luck?

Misrepresenting history.  Steve Jobs had no problem with Android until it became dominate.  Those are the facts.  Once Android started to overtae the iPhone in marketshare that is when Steve Jobs started having a problem with Android.  Look at his original comments on Android when it was first released and he welcomed the competition.   

 

When it came to Android he didn't.  And yes a lot of the success he had was luck.  To say it wasn't is wrong.


Edited by HTC4LIFE - 3/17/14 at 3:08pm
post #114 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTC4LIFE View Post

Misrepresenting history.  Steve Jobs had no problem with Android until it became dominate.  Those are the facts.  Once Android started to overtae the iPhone in marketshare that is when Steve Jobs started having a problem with Android.  Look at his original comments on Android when it was first released and he welcomed the competition.   

When it came to Android he didn't.  And yes a lot of the success he had was luck.  To say it wasn't is wrong.

1) Explain to me the luck of Pixar. Or the iPhone? Or the Mac? Or the iPad? What I see is a lot focus and drive to make something excellent. It seems improbable that Steve just happened to get lucky for 4 decades across multiple businesses and products but if you want to argue that Steve was an idiot who had no talent or skills I'm more than willing to hear you out.

2) Again, what dominance did Android have when Schmidt was dropped from the board? What dominance do they even have now in terms of a business model that matches Apple's? Remember Apple makes a complete product and I don't see the Nexus HW with Android even coming close to selling in volume of what Apple sells? Is there even an Android-based OEM that sells as smartphones or tablets of a single model in volumes or as quickly as Apple can… or are you just trying to paint a picture that a freely distributed OS is somehow on par with the iPhone and iPad products?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply
post #115 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

Your last sentence is true EXCEPT for patents that are necessary to patent to participate in a market. For example, any patent that must be used to make a functional cell phone operational on a public system. These patents must be licensed and fall under that rules of FRAND. However, Apple patent that makes a list "bounce" when it scrolls to the end is part of trade dress and not required to scroll a list, therefore is not required to scroll a list, and Apple can refuse to license it to another company. This is one of the patents Samsung copied that is not essential and they do not want to pay Apple to use... see the diff??

I completely understand the difference. Here's an example:

Apple was recently found to infringe on patents owned by VirnetX. If they insisted on an injunction, refuse any infringing iPhones entry to the US, would that acceptable to you? Apple is illegally using patented tech not licensed to them and continues to do so with no complete workaround yet. Is that enough to warrant removal of the infringing devices from the market if the patent holder asks for it pending a settlement? It's only a couple of patents out of the several thousand required to sell a smartphone.
Edited by Gatorguy - 3/17/14 at 3:32pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #116 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


1) Explain to me the luck of Pixar. Or the iPhone? Or the Mac? Or the iPad? What I see is a lot focus and drive to make something excellent. It seems improbable that Steve just happened to get lucky for 4 decades across multiple businesses and products but if you want to argue that Steve was an idiot who had no talent or skills I'm more than willing to hear you out.

2) Again, what dominance did Android have when Schmidt was dropped from the board? What dominance do they even have now in terms of a business model that matches Apple's? Remember Apple makes a complete product and I don't see the Nexus HW with Android even coming close to selling in volume of what Apple sells? Is there even an Android-based OEM that sells as smartphones or tablets of a single model in volumes or as quickly as Apple can… or are you just trying to paint a picture that a freely distributed OS is somehow on par with the iPhone and iPad products?

What luck was their with the iPhone, or Mac or iPad?  How about the luck of bring a product that people wanted.  Tech experts said the iPad would be D.O.A and some said that about the iPhone as well.   Luck was a factor in them being successful.

 

Eric Schmidt didn't resign because of Jobs feeling Android was stolen.  Steve Jobs even commented on the resignation when it happened.  Saying it was because of Android but because of to quote Steve Jobs ''Unfortunately, as Google enters more of Apple's core businesses, with Android and now Chrome OS, Eric's effectiveness as an Apple board member will be significantly diminished," See anything about being accused of stealing.  Trying to rewrite history again.

 

We are not even talking about the Nexus.  And the Nexus line is not aimed at the average consumer.  Never has been really, with the exception of the Nexus 7 tablet, the Nexus line has always been aimed at and for developers.  That is why you find top of the line hardware at a cheap price point.  So they can sell unlocked phones from Google straight to the developer for 400 dollars and the developer knows they have spec wise the best specs available at the time and will not have to worry about carriers delaying OS updates.  Tell you one Android based OEM that sells smartphones or tablets as quickly and in high volumes like Apple?  Well yeah I can.  It is the OEM i hate but Samsung has proven they can do that with the Galaxy S line of smartphones.  They have proven they can sell them as quickly and in high volumes.  So your statement their is false.

 

Can a freely disturbed OS be on par with iOS?  

 

Well if you are talking about User experience yes.  HTC has an amazing user experience.  Motorola on the Moto X has an incredible user experience.  As does the Nexus line.  If you are talking in sales  No because of course the OS on the most  phones ie Android will own marketshare.

post #117 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTC4LIFE View Post

How about the luck of bring a product that people wanted.

What the luck?! If you think the countless cost in R&D, prototypes, etc. were all luck then you're seriously lucked in head.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply
post #118 of 141

Quote:

Originally Posted by kent909 View Post
 

When I say knock off I mean intent to copy exactly. A fake iPhone, not a similar design like a Samsung. Where do you draw the line. Only the first car can have four wheels?

 

Sounds like somebody didn't hear about the billion-dollar court judgement against Samsung for, well, copying the iPhone.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 


Here’s my question. We know this. MARVIN has confirmed it. Why isn’t he banned? Why aren’t all his posts deleted? 

 

Wait, you mean they actually ban the obvious anti-Apple trolls here???  Wow, how refreshing!  Looks like I'm going to enjoy this forum so much better than MacRumors, where they not only tolerate the career haters, but fluff their pillows and place a mint on them.  :mad: 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
 

Groan. The samdroid vermin are out in full force.

 

As always.

 

This Web needs an enema.

FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
post #119 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHotFuzz View Post

Wait, you mean they actually ban the obvious anti-Apple trolls here???

All trolls should be banned. It's possible to be a troll while acting overly positive about Apple. Just read any of SudoNym's posts.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

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

Reply
post #120 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

All trolls should be banned. It's possible to be a troll while acting overly positive about Apple. Just read any of SudoNym's posts.

How could you choose SudoNym over Apple ][?
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple's Ive describes struggle for perfection in interview, calls copycat designs 'theft'