Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost
I was perhaps a bit harsh on you. However, your comment that 'software rules all in terms of being a product differential' is silly. Also, your sympathy for those who are 'fatigued' by the patent lawsuits I find weak and wrong-hearted.
I don't take issue with the harshness (others can judge that for themselves) - the problem is that you answered a point I didn't make.
This latest post comes slightly closer, but is still filled with silly emotive rhetoric. Nevertheless, in an attempt to make my thoughts clearer, I'll have a go at responding.
On the first point about software ruling all; what's silly is if you only take that at face value and therefore misunderstand the point (which you apparently did).
The point I was making is the exact point that Steve Jobs made years ago about the iPod. He explained that on the surface, iPod is "just a small computer". What makes it a killer product is the software (and now, we might add "services" or "ecosystem" to that point).
The same is absolutely true about smart phones. The key differential is the software; the operating system and its UI, the ecosystem, the content. This does not mean that hardware can't be a differential, but software is key and Apple understands this.
Some people (perhaps the Android apologists you speak of?) occasionally suggest that no company should ever be able to patent or copyright aspects of software design. A subset of those people make valid points about "patent trolling" and overstretching the bounds of IP - but generally, what they are missing is that the competition and innovation is really being driven from the software end of things. In that kind of environment, I believe you have to allow companies to (within reason) patent and copyright designs so that there is an incentive to innovate (where those innovations can be protected from rip-offs).
On the second point...weak and wrong-hearted? Are you even serious, or are you just trolling now?
How is it weak and wrong-hearted to be tired of the constant legal battles? I would hazard a guess that Tim Cook himself is tired of them! Being tired of these battles does not mean that I don't support Apple's right to defend its patents, and you would be stretching the bow rather far to glean such an interpretation from my comments.
Instead of being needlessly emotive and silly, it would be helpful to focus on the substance of what I'm saying. I hope that this post clarifies significantly. If not, feel free to ask a question of me (perhaps without the clumsy attempts to insult me on a personal level).