Quote:
Originally Posted by Elijahg
Actually, I read that part twice, to make sure that what I was writing was correct. To me, Wu seems to say "[MS] failed in replicating one of the key pieces of the unique iPod experience with its scrolling click-wheel", then later answers his own question by saying about patent infringement. I was simply wondering why Wu even thought about MS copying the click-wheel, when copying it would be obvious patent infringement.
What Wu is doing, is stating what is on everyone's mind. That MS (and others) have tried everything to take sales away from the iPod, but failed. That they are so overwhelmed by the lack of success, no matter how they try to differentiate themselves, that they have finally decided to at least copy the look, even if they can't copy the functionality. Then he points out, for those who might not realize it, and are wondering why no one has duplicated the actual click-scrollwheel, that Apple has it patented.
You would be surprised at just how many people ask why other companies don't make a scrollwheel as well.
While most people writing on web boards know this, most people do not.
That's why what these analysts say, seems obvious to us, even though it isn't. They aren't speaking to us, they are speaking to investors, who understand what the fundamentals of a company must be, but who are not technologically sophisticated.
Also, many people here make comments about what should be, only after the companies who track these matters release their data to the publicafter their clients get the FULL reports, and have had time to digest them.
This information goes around the web sites so many times in a short while that people forget where they first saw it, and where it actually came from.
Ok, ok, no such thing as a 240Gb microdrive 8)
