Hey I am happy for Apple. For years I have been watching Apple create great products and software and love them all (sure a few hiccups here and there) and all I see is competition that see Apple as a threat to there market try suing Apple. Apple for years has been taking the punches from others it's nice to see them fight back.
My take is that Apple hasn't patented the concept of "multi-touch", but has patented the specific algorithms used by the device to correctly interpret what users' touches mean. For example, "Touch Screen Device, Method, And Graphical User Interface For Determining Commands By Applying Heuristics." From Wikipedia, "In computer science, a heuristic algorithm, or simply a heuristic, is an algorithm that is able to produce an acceptable solution to a problem in many practical scenarios, in the fashion of a general heuristic, but for which there is no formal proof of its correctness..."
Obviously Apple can't patent the idea of touching a screen, but I think what Apple has patented is how the iPhone intreprets such a touch. The titile of the patent says, "Determining Commands By Applying Heuristics." Is this a click? Does the user mean to scroll down? Is he flicking to the next photo? Is this a pinch? Is this a random touch to be ignored?
I would think that HTC would have to divulge what it's algorithms are in order to prove they didn't copy Apple's.
This is where it then becomes really muddy. Lets say HTC uses an algorithm that isn't an exact copy of Apple's but it does the exact same thing in the end. Is it still considered copying?
For those of you who know math well, I use solving ODEs as an example. There's the traditional way of using the homogeneous and particular solutions and then there's using Laplace transforms. On the top level, you're both solving an ODE. But in the details, you used two different methods to get to the answer.
At this point, the "spirit" of the patent is pretty much thrown out and it becomes which side's team of lawyers can find the most technicalities to out-maneuver the other.
Apple PAID Xerox for use of their IP: GUI, mouse, laser printing, etc..
Without Apple, computers today would look like something from Brazil (the movie).
Yeah, right. Without Apple we'd still be using the command line, because nobody else would have bought Xerox's technology, and nobody else would have figured out an alternative to DOS.
And without Thomas Edison we'd be facing an acute shortage of whale oil which would be the only thing enabling us to things at night.
Come on guys, without competition, what would we have?
So am I to understand that your idea of competition is stealing someone else's IP? That does not sound competitive - just outright theft! (Assuming Apple's Patents are upheld.)
Just curious, why do you always post from your Iphone?
Some typos make it obvious you're using an iPhone. Like most people, I seem to spend most of life in lines or waiting somewhere. The iPhone is a convenient tool for passing the time.
Quote:
No, Apple had a strong case against Palm, they just didn't see them as a real threat. Htc coupled with Android is a very real threat. It's on the table. And I agree with the above statements that the Implementation of multitouch to the N1 in addition to Sense UI probably tipped the scale.
If Palm can get more successful we might see Apple go after them, unless Palm has something on them. We saw Apple take their good ol' time with Psystar. "When to strike is as important as the where and how."
I hear everyone screaming "reform" and while it's not that I don't disagree the system needs to be looked at but do anyone of you have any ideas of what you think the system needs to be reformed? I mean the public school system has been reformed many times. Is it any better? It's not a perfect system and neither is the judicial system but it works!
While I posted in a similar vein when the Nokia suit story broke here, it bears repeating. First you cannot judge a patent by it's title, no matter how many you list in sequence. It is the details of the patent, the technology, etc. that are critical, period. So to cry foul based on the title or concept is to demonstrate a very deep lack of understanding of the patent/tort system and pertaining laws, no matter how broken it is.
Second, multitouch has many, many implementations. There is no effective way to carry multitouch specifically into this conversation without being very specific about to which implementation of multitouch you refer. Apple is of course suing on the basis of its very particular implementation of multitouch, derived (most likely, but not definitively) from its acquisition of a smaller multitouch developer company and its patents/IP.
I have not yet seen an opinion expressed in this thread that demonstrates any expertise in patent law or the purported technologies in question under the suit, so all of this is purely speculative and more or less inaccurate, as none of us have the necessary information required to make anything but an uninformed observation.
As for attributing anything like emotions to a large corporation, that's simply anthropmorphising at a ridiculous level, something else I posted on a while back. Apple, Microsoft, HTC, Motorola aren't "scared" of anything. The executives, managers and administrators spend their time directing operations to ensure the ongoing success of the corporation. If it makes business sense to sue another company, based on targeted research into their products and services compared to owned IP or competitive offerings, that's what they do. If it makes business sense to partner with a company that competes with them, they do that too. The corporate business landscape is incredibly complex, and involves a matrix of competing and cooperating relationships that the average person wouldn't and doesn't grasp. Especially as evidenced here.
I hear everyone screaming "reform" and while it's not that I don't disagree the system needs to be looked at but do anyone of you have any ideas of what you think the system needs to be reformed? I mean the public school system has been reformed many times. Is it any better? It's not a perfect system and neither is the judicial system but it works!
The judicial system is a convoluted mess of bureaucracy and corruption.
This is where it then becomes really muddy. Lets say HTC uses an algorithm that isn't an exact copy of Apple's but it does the exact same thing in the end. Is it still considered copying?
For those of you who know math well, I use solving ODEs as an example. There's the traditional way of using the homogeneous and particular solutions and then there's using Laplace transforms. On the top level, you're both solving an ODE. But in the details, you used two different methods to get to the answer.
At this point, the "spirit" of the patent is pretty much thrown out and it becomes which side's team of lawyers can find the most technicalities to out-maneuver the other.
Can you image a situation that somebody would patent a certain method of solving an ODE? Or may be someone would patent the idea of solving an ODE??
OMF, it will stop the progress and roll us back for a long time...
How can apple patent something like changing voltage to a portion of a processor when their is prior art going back decades?
Patents are granted on implementations, not ideas. So presumably their argument would be that HTC copied the exact same way in which they achieve this, which is also (presumably) unique.
Who is right or wrong is what the whole court thing is about.
While I posted in a similar vein when the Nokia suit story broke here, it bears repeating. First you cannot judge a patent by it's title, no matter how many you list in sequence. It is the details of the patent, the technology, etc. that are critical, period. So to cry foul based on the title or concept is to demonstrate a very deep lack of understanding of the patent/tort system and pertaining laws, no matter how broken it is.
Second, multitouch has many, many implementations. There is no effective way to carry multitouch specifically into this conversation without being very specific about to which implementation of multitouch you refer. Apple is of course suing on the basis of its very particular implementation of multitouch, derived (most likely, but not definitively) from its acquisition of a smaller multitouch developer company and its patents/IP.
I have not yet seen an opinion expressed in this thread that demonstrates any expertise in patent law or the purported technologies in question under the suit, so all of this is purely speculative and more or less inaccurate, as none of us have the necessary information required to make anything but an uninformed observation.
As for attributing anything like emotions to a large corporation, that's simply anthropmorphising at a ridiculous level, something else I posted on a while back. Apple, Microsoft, HTC, Motorola aren't "scared" of anything. The executives, managers and administrators spend their time directing operations to ensure the ongoing success of the corporation. If it makes business sense to sue another company, based on targeted research into their products and services compared to owned IP or competitive offerings, that's what they do. If it makes business sense to partner with a company that competes with them, they do that too. The corporate business landscape is incredibly complex, and involves a matrix of competing and cooperating relationships that the average person wouldn't and doesn't grasp. Especially as evidenced here.
I find it amusing you think everyone in here is idiots and couldn't possibly understand corporations.
I think in fact corporations do have emotions. They are very much like people.
Yes even people will partner with 'competitors' if the end result is to their benifit. How many times have you seen that in history where a country or two people who where enemies joined together for a cause that benifited both of them (or only one, after the other stabbed one in the back).
As for emotions, scared may not be the best word but it does describe what you said. The company did research and is 'afraid' that another company may have a better received product so that company will see what tools it has available (patents) and use them.
And I never said I was an expert, but i'm no fool either. I understand what is going on with this suit. I think Apple needs to be careful as this can be a PR disaster as well, especially if Google or Microsoft join in. In these connected time, everything has potential PR fallouts especially when in save for Blackberry, iPhone is #1 in the US.
Even Engadget has now labeled this as a suit against primarily Android. So I think the general tech consensus is getting quite clear. Also this suit doesn't mention Multitouch. So maybe YOU should get your fact straight.
Edit: Let me also add, that this is an Apple fansite. Where fans (or not) comment on Apple related (and sometimes not) news. Nobody ever said you had to be an expert to comment, as this is not a professional site. I find it amusing that there is always one of you around on the various sites I visit that claims people have no right to comment or have an opinion.
Comments
Apple is the largest cell phone seller by profit in the world. Others sell more units... Apple makes more money..
If you include computers, software, ipods, peripherals, songs, etc. etc.
Not if you compare profit made on telephones vs. profits made my nokia or ericsson or motorola or HTC or etc. etc. on telephones.
That statement by Stevie was pretty loaded. But I guess you went for it....
My take is that Apple hasn't patented the concept of "multi-touch", but has patented the specific algorithms used by the device to correctly interpret what users' touches mean. For example, "Touch Screen Device, Method, And Graphical User Interface For Determining Commands By Applying Heuristics." From Wikipedia, "In computer science, a heuristic algorithm, or simply a heuristic, is an algorithm that is able to produce an acceptable solution to a problem in many practical scenarios, in the fashion of a general heuristic, but for which there is no formal proof of its correctness..."
Obviously Apple can't patent the idea of touching a screen, but I think what Apple has patented is how the iPhone intreprets such a touch. The titile of the patent says, "Determining Commands By Applying Heuristics." Is this a click? Does the user mean to scroll down? Is he flicking to the next photo? Is this a pinch? Is this a random touch to be ignored?
I would think that HTC would have to divulge what it's algorithms are in order to prove they didn't copy Apple's.
This is where it then becomes really muddy. Lets say HTC uses an algorithm that isn't an exact copy of Apple's but it does the exact same thing in the end. Is it still considered copying?
For those of you who know math well, I use solving ODEs as an example. There's the traditional way of using the homogeneous and particular solutions and then there's using Laplace transforms. On the top level, you're both solving an ODE. But in the details, you used two different methods to get to the answer.
At this point, the "spirit" of the patent is pretty much thrown out and it becomes which side's team of lawyers can find the most technicalities to out-maneuver the other.
Apple PAID Xerox for use of their IP: GUI, mouse, laser printing, etc..
Without Apple, computers today would look like something from Brazil (the movie).
Yeah, right. Without Apple we'd still be using the command line, because nobody else would have bought Xerox's technology, and nobody else would have figured out an alternative to DOS.
And without Thomas Edison we'd be facing an acute shortage of whale oil which would be the only thing enabling us to things at night.
I like them better than the iPhone...
Come on guys, without competition, what would we have?
So am I to understand that your idea of competition is stealing someone else's IP? That does not sound competitive - just outright theft! (Assuming Apple's Patents are upheld.)
Just curious, why do you always post from your Iphone?
No, Apple had a strong case against Palm, they just didn't see them as a real threat. Htc coupled with Android is a very real threat. It's on the table. And I agree with the above statements that the Implementation of multitouch to the N1 in addition to Sense UI probably tipped the scale.
If Palm can get more successful we might see Apple go after them, unless Palm has something on them. We saw Apple take their good ol' time with Psystar. "When to strike is as important as the where and how."
Lets just say that I am buying a pair of Nexus Ones later this month....
I like them better than the iPhone...
What the hell does that have to do with a patent case?
Oh well thanks for the update since a lot of us were losing sleep!
Second, multitouch has many, many implementations. There is no effective way to carry multitouch specifically into this conversation without being very specific about to which implementation of multitouch you refer. Apple is of course suing on the basis of its very particular implementation of multitouch, derived (most likely, but not definitively) from its acquisition of a smaller multitouch developer company and its patents/IP.
I have not yet seen an opinion expressed in this thread that demonstrates any expertise in patent law or the purported technologies in question under the suit, so all of this is purely speculative and more or less inaccurate, as none of us have the necessary information required to make anything but an uninformed observation.
As for attributing anything like emotions to a large corporation, that's simply anthropmorphising at a ridiculous level, something else I posted on a while back. Apple, Microsoft, HTC, Motorola aren't "scared" of anything. The executives, managers and administrators spend their time directing operations to ensure the ongoing success of the corporation. If it makes business sense to sue another company, based on targeted research into their products and services compared to owned IP or competitive offerings, that's what they do. If it makes business sense to partner with a company that competes with them, they do that too. The corporate business landscape is incredibly complex, and involves a matrix of competing and cooperating relationships that the average person wouldn't and doesn't grasp. Especially as evidenced here.
I hear everyone screaming "reform" and while it's not that I don't disagree the system needs to be looked at but do anyone of you have any ideas of what you think the system needs to be reformed? I mean the public school system has been reformed many times. Is it any better? It's not a perfect system and neither is the judicial system but it works!
The judicial system is a convoluted mess of bureaucracy and corruption.
This is where it then becomes really muddy. Lets say HTC uses an algorithm that isn't an exact copy of Apple's but it does the exact same thing in the end. Is it still considered copying?
For those of you who know math well, I use solving ODEs as an example. There's the traditional way of using the homogeneous and particular solutions and then there's using Laplace transforms. On the top level, you're both solving an ODE. But in the details, you used two different methods to get to the answer.
At this point, the "spirit" of the patent is pretty much thrown out and it becomes which side's team of lawyers can find the most technicalities to out-maneuver the other.
Can you image a situation that somebody would patent a certain method of solving an ODE? Or may be someone would patent the idea of solving an ODE??
OMF, it will stop the progress and roll us back for a long time...
The judicial system is a convoluted mess of bureaucracy and corruption.
Can't say I totally disagree. But I rather be on trial in American than anywhere else
How can apple patent something like changing voltage to a portion of a processor when their is prior art going back decades?
Patents are granted on implementations, not ideas. So presumably their argument would be that HTC copied the exact same way in which they achieve this, which is also (presumably) unique.
Who is right or wrong is what the whole court thing is about.
Can't say I totally disagree. But I rather be on trial in American than anywhere else
Do you have some knowledge about any judicial system outside of the US?
While I posted in a similar vein when the Nokia suit story broke here, it bears repeating. First you cannot judge a patent by it's title, no matter how many you list in sequence. It is the details of the patent, the technology, etc. that are critical, period. So to cry foul based on the title or concept is to demonstrate a very deep lack of understanding of the patent/tort system and pertaining laws, no matter how broken it is.
Second, multitouch has many, many implementations. There is no effective way to carry multitouch specifically into this conversation without being very specific about to which implementation of multitouch you refer. Apple is of course suing on the basis of its very particular implementation of multitouch, derived (most likely, but not definitively) from its acquisition of a smaller multitouch developer company and its patents/IP.
I have not yet seen an opinion expressed in this thread that demonstrates any expertise in patent law or the purported technologies in question under the suit, so all of this is purely speculative and more or less inaccurate, as none of us have the necessary information required to make anything but an uninformed observation.
As for attributing anything like emotions to a large corporation, that's simply anthropmorphising at a ridiculous level, something else I posted on a while back. Apple, Microsoft, HTC, Motorola aren't "scared" of anything. The executives, managers and administrators spend their time directing operations to ensure the ongoing success of the corporation. If it makes business sense to sue another company, based on targeted research into their products and services compared to owned IP or competitive offerings, that's what they do. If it makes business sense to partner with a company that competes with them, they do that too. The corporate business landscape is incredibly complex, and involves a matrix of competing and cooperating relationships that the average person wouldn't and doesn't grasp. Especially as evidenced here.
I find it amusing you think everyone in here is idiots and couldn't possibly understand corporations.
I think in fact corporations do have emotions. They are very much like people.
Yes even people will partner with 'competitors' if the end result is to their benifit. How many times have you seen that in history where a country or two people who where enemies joined together for a cause that benifited both of them (or only one, after the other stabbed one in the back).
As for emotions, scared may not be the best word but it does describe what you said. The company did research and is 'afraid' that another company may have a better received product so that company will see what tools it has available (patents) and use them.
And I never said I was an expert, but i'm no fool either. I understand what is going on with this suit. I think Apple needs to be careful as this can be a PR disaster as well, especially if Google or Microsoft join in. In these connected time, everything has potential PR fallouts especially when in save for Blackberry, iPhone is #1 in the US.
Even Engadget has now labeled this as a suit against primarily Android. So I think the general tech consensus is getting quite clear. Also this suit doesn't mention Multitouch. So maybe YOU should get your fact straight.
Edit: Let me also add, that this is an Apple fansite. Where fans (or not) comment on Apple related (and sometimes not) news. Nobody ever said you had to be an expert to comment, as this is not a professional site. I find it amusing that there is always one of you around on the various sites I visit that claims people have no right to comment or have an opinion.
Do you?
Do you have some knowledge about any judicial system outside of the US?
Do you?
I do have