Without capitalism you wouldn't have the phones to begin with.
To fail, capitalism must have worked to some extent. Which can't be said for hippy ideals.
I don't think so. Without Capitalism or any other form of Monetary System we would be far technologically and socially advanced. There wouldn't be need to make a product with just few features and then hold other features till next year to make profit.
Anyway, too grand to talk about it in AppleInsider.
WTF? The virtual keyboard had been known long time before iPhone was introduced.
It's not the concept or image of the virtual keyboard. It's how did the company make it work in its product. What algorithms did they use? What sensing technologies did they use? How did it all work together to allow a user to type letters that get recorded?
Patents are about mechanisms, processes, techniques, algorithms.
It's not the concept or image of the virtual keyboard. It's how did the company make it work in its product. What algorithms did they use? What sensing technologies did they use? How did it all work together to allow a user to type letters that get recorded?
Patents are about mechanisms, processes, techniques, algorithms.
And how exactly would Apple know such a thing? Reverse engineer htc devices? Isn't that illegal?
If they didn't, then aren't they going out on a limb and guessing the same methods are used?
Think about what this may do to Windows Phone 7. While this is playing out in the courts, MS will be wondering what to put in and what to leave out.
Actually, I think Microsoft and Nokia have been busily studying all of Apple's patents and that's why it's taking them so long to bring something to market.
They are looking for alternative ways around the patents. But I wonder if they're surprised by the breadth of this lawsuit - going from DSPs all the way into OO software.
Funny that Angus apparently did not realize the ignorance and lack of knowledge of his own post.
I'll bet money that IF Angus responds in this thread, he will skillfully skirt around this whopper of a screw-up or he will claim he was discussing in Taiwanese dollars the entire time.
I'm surprised Apple didn't file in the eastern district of Texas. If anything, I'd do it just for the humor aspect of it.
In all seriousness though, the smartphone market was totally stillborn before Apple came in with guns a'blazin. WinMo was a joke and the only real player was RIM. The hardware was laughable at best with pathetic keyboards, lousy construction.
Now comes Apple and totally changes the game. Many of the phone makers and OS providers (Ballmer, RIM) totally ripped on Apple and screamed at the top of their lungs how no one would EVER pay that much for a phone, let alone one with no physical keyboard. MANY whiners on this very board felt the exact same way.
It's no surprise that now that Apple has hit a huge home run in this field that everyone else is playing catch-up and shockingly, making phones / OS very similar to the iPhone. Eating crow is not something they do very well.
For HTC (for example) to claim they've been innovating for 13 years is pure BS. They have shown zero "innovation" before the iPhone was introduced. Their current products just reek of build-as-fast-as-one-can to get it to market in the hopes of getting some of the action. It no where even shows the kind of quality that gives the notion that serious thought to details have been done.
I think we need patent reform. I truly do. But I for one am with Apple on this one. They did a huge amount of R&D and if a maker is shown to be violating it, I hope they get the hammer in hopefully a much more harder way than say Psystar got away with.
I also believe in consumer choice and competition. Those here that worry about Apple succeeding are just being selfish and naive. Without the ability to protect one's investment, there would be no motivation to innovate. We'd still be stuck with Motorola's StarTac phones if that were the case (which IMHO was a very cool phone!).
Amen on all points, although HTC's UI was appreciably better looking than most of the other WinMo phones out there.
(Yeah, I know that "better looking" has no correlation whatsoever to innovation.)
I'm surprised Apple didn't file in the eastern district of Texas. If anything, I'd do it just for the humor aspect of it.
In all seriousness though, the smartphone market was totally stillborn before Apple came in with guns a'blazin. WinMo was a joke and the only real player was RIM. The hardware was laughable at best with pathetic keyboards, lousy construction.
Now comes Apple and totally changes the game. Many of the phone makers and OS providers (Ballmer, RIM) totally ripped on Apple and screamed at the top of their lungs how no one would EVER pay that much for a phone, let alone one with no physical keyboard. MANY whiners on this very board felt the exact same way.
It's no surprise that now that Apple has hit a huge home run in this field that everyone else is playing catch-up and shockingly, making phones / OS very similar to the iPhone. Eating crow is not something they do very well.
For HTC (for example) to claim they've been innovating for 13 years is pure BS. They have shown zero "innovation" before the iPhone was introduced. Their current products just reek of build-as-fast-as-one-can to get it to market in the hopes of getting some of the action. It no where even shows the kind of quality that gives the notion that serious thought to details have been done.
I think we need patent reform. I truly do. But I for one am with Apple on this one. They did a huge amount of R&D and if a maker is shown to be violating it, I hope they get the hammer in hopefully a much more harder way than say Psystar got away with.
I also believe in consumer choice and competition. Those here that worry about Apple succeeding are just being selfish and naive. Without the ability to protect one's investment, there would be no motivation to innovate. We'd still be stuck with Motorola's StarTac phones if that were the case (which IMHO was a very cool phone!).
The 13 years, BS or not, does not cut it anyway. One key patent (#5,481,721) was filed in 1994 and granted fourteen months later.
I don't think so. Without Capitalism or any other form of Monetary System we would be far technologically and socially advanced. There wouldn't be need to make a product with just few features and then hold other features till next year to make profit.
Anyway, too grand to talk about it in AppleInsider.
Whatever you're smoking, put it down. What would be the point in a company making any product?
hey man! what if like, umm, groups of people got together, and like, umm made things for other people, but then traded those things for items of value that equaled the product as well as the time and effort put into making that product. Like wooooah man I just destroyed capitalism!
I find it funny How many people are saying it is lame or bad for humanity that Apple should defend its patent. Apparently they don?t understand why we have patents to begin with. How is HTC stealing Apples ideas for profit helping humanity? Wouldn?t humanity and consumers be better served if they developed new ideas to solve problems so that we all would have more choices? They can always fall back on Apples ideas in 20 years when patents expires. In the meanwhile, Apples ability to profit off its patents is what encourages them to spend the R&D money to develop new technologies that ultimately push us all forward. Without that protection to profit for 20 years, there would be no incentives for that expenditure.
Hey, some common sense.
Welcome to AI, where you'll often find that trait somewhat lacking - both for and against Apple.
It is about time that Apple made some moves to defend their patents.
It is funny though, how some people here take such a holier than thou attitude about Apple against HTC. Almost as though they don't realize that Apple has 'borrowed' features in the iPhone as well.
What "borrowed" features? Were those features patented? If so, is Apple already paying IP (intellectual property) fees or using components that are already paying IP fees?
I'm surprised Apple didn't file in the eastern district of Texas. If anything, I'd do it just for the humor aspect of it.
The eastern district of Texas is for shitty patent trolls.
If anything this adds some kind of weight and credibility to Apple's case as they are willing to fight it more on its merits.
Quote:
I also believe in consumer choice and competition. Those here that worry about Apple succeeding are just being selfish and naive. Without the ability to protect one's investment, there would be no motivation to innovate. We'd still be stuck with Motorola's StarTac phones if that were the case (which IMHO was a very cool phone!).
Exactly, and with all that consumer choice and competition, they have chosen the iPhone. The sane man's choice. I'm with you 100% on your posting.
Such as patents that Palm holds. A couple examples:
#7,268,775 "Dynamic brightness range for portable computer displays based on ambient conditions" i.e. using ambient light sensors to adjust display brightness, a la iPhone.
#7,007,239, "Method and apparatus for accessing a contacts database and telephone services" i.e. phone.app including buttons in the phone.app UI to bring up contacts, history, etc. In fact the diagram in the Palm patent submission is almost a diagram of the iPhone phone UI but was from 2006.
That's just two. Palm has something like 1500 patents in their portfolio for mobiles.
Seriously, why do you think Apple hasn't sued Palm? The resulting counter suits from Palm, if successful (and likely they would be) would gut much of the basic elements of the iPhone experience.
Do you know that Apple uses the Palm patented technique in either case? Did you consider that there's more than one way to use light sensors to adjust display brightness? Does the 239 patent involve multi-touch in accessing the database and services?
I don't know why Apple hasn't sued Palm. For one, maybe Palm found a different, ingenious way to implement multi-touch. Or Apple may sue Palm in about 6 months. After all, it took Apple 1.5 years before suing HTC about the Dream/G1.
Some people here are probably going to find a way to justify Apple's stiff-arm tactics, and I don't much care what your justifications are. They are stifling innovation, period. For me, its HTC all the way from now on.
How does it stifle innovation?
Assuming HTC is guilty (which they might not be), wouldn't we all be better off it HTC found another, hopefully better, faster, efficient, way to implement an objects, multi-touch, power saving, etc? How does it advance technology for them to do it the exact same way?
HTC: Your Honor, I’m going to demonstrate how our software differs from the iDont. I’m launching Pandora now… Can you hear the music? I’m now going to check my email.. Do you still hear the music?? Now I’m launching the Web Browser.. Can you still hear the music???
Judge: Case closed!!
Of course you're describing Microsoft and Google software there aren't you.
Come back when you have a clue. The fact that both WinMo and Android-based HTC phones are being targeted, suggests that it is something specific about HTC's handsets, such as the Sense UI maybe?
Seriously, why do you think Apple hasn't sued Palm? The resulting counter suits from Palm, if successful (and likely they would be) would gut much of the basic elements of the iPhone experience.
Nah !! Palm's dead anyway. Why waste money on suing Palm? Apple wants to hobble Google and the Androidies. When Palm is on its last legs, Apple will just buy their patent portfolio. And bury Web OS.
And how exactly would Apple know such a thing? Reverse engineer htc devices? Isn't that illegal?
If they didn't, then aren't they going out on a limb and guessing the same methods are used?
Reverse engineering isn't illegal. There's no DMCA issue involved here.
And don't you think Apple (and every corporation with a significant set of patents) has a department that takes apart and tests devices from other companies?
Comments
Without capitalism you wouldn't have the phones to begin with.
To fail, capitalism must have worked to some extent. Which can't be said for hippy ideals.
I don't think so. Without Capitalism or any other form of Monetary System we would be far technologically and socially advanced. There wouldn't be need to make a product with just few features and then hold other features till next year to make profit.
Anyway, too grand to talk about it in AppleInsider.
WTF? The virtual keyboard had been known long time before iPhone was introduced.
It's not the concept or image of the virtual keyboard. It's how did the company make it work in its product. What algorithms did they use? What sensing technologies did they use? How did it all work together to allow a user to type letters that get recorded?
Patents are about mechanisms, processes, techniques, algorithms.
It's not the concept or image of the virtual keyboard. It's how did the company make it work in its product. What algorithms did they use? What sensing technologies did they use? How did it all work together to allow a user to type letters that get recorded?
Patents are about mechanisms, processes, techniques, algorithms.
And how exactly would Apple know such a thing? Reverse engineer htc devices? Isn't that illegal?
If they didn't, then aren't they going out on a limb and guessing the same methods are used?
Think about what this may do to Windows Phone 7. While this is playing out in the courts, MS will be wondering what to put in and what to leave out.
Actually, I think Microsoft and Nokia have been busily studying all of Apple's patents and that's why it's taking them so long to bring something to market.
They are looking for alternative ways around the patents. But I wonder if they're surprised by the breadth of this lawsuit - going from DSPs all the way into OO software.
Your lack of knowledge and ignorance given the comment above is amazing.
You do realize that HTC has a 260 Billion dollar market cap as of today.
http://investing.businessweek.com/re...ticker=2498:TT
Funny that Angus apparently did not realize the ignorance and lack of knowledge of his own post.
I'll bet money that IF Angus responds in this thread, he will skillfully skirt around this whopper of a screw-up or he will claim he was discussing in Taiwanese dollars the entire time.
I'm surprised Apple didn't file in the eastern district of Texas. If anything, I'd do it just for the humor aspect of it.
In all seriousness though, the smartphone market was totally stillborn before Apple came in with guns a'blazin. WinMo was a joke and the only real player was RIM. The hardware was laughable at best with pathetic keyboards, lousy construction.
Now comes Apple and totally changes the game. Many of the phone makers and OS providers (Ballmer, RIM) totally ripped on Apple and screamed at the top of their lungs how no one would EVER pay that much for a phone, let alone one with no physical keyboard. MANY whiners on this very board felt the exact same way.
It's no surprise that now that Apple has hit a huge home run in this field that everyone else is playing catch-up and shockingly, making phones / OS very similar to the iPhone. Eating crow is not something they do very well.
For HTC (for example) to claim they've been innovating for 13 years is pure BS. They have shown zero "innovation" before the iPhone was introduced. Their current products just reek of build-as-fast-as-one-can to get it to market in the hopes of getting some of the action. It no where even shows the kind of quality that gives the notion that serious thought to details have been done.
I think we need patent reform. I truly do. But I for one am with Apple on this one. They did a huge amount of R&D and if a maker is shown to be violating it, I hope they get the hammer in hopefully a much more harder way than say Psystar got away with.
I also believe in consumer choice and competition. Those here that worry about Apple succeeding are just being selfish and naive. Without the ability to protect one's investment, there would be no motivation to innovate. We'd still be stuck with Motorola's StarTac phones if that were the case (which IMHO was a very cool phone!).
Amen on all points, although HTC's UI was appreciably better looking than most of the other WinMo phones out there.
(Yeah, I know that "better looking" has no correlation whatsoever to innovation.)
"We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas." -- Steve Jobs, 1996.
Great quote. There's nothing wrong with stealing ideas. Ideas aren't patentable.
It's the processes one uses to implement those ideas that are patentable.
I'm surprised Apple didn't file in the eastern district of Texas. If anything, I'd do it just for the humor aspect of it.
In all seriousness though, the smartphone market was totally stillborn before Apple came in with guns a'blazin. WinMo was a joke and the only real player was RIM. The hardware was laughable at best with pathetic keyboards, lousy construction.
Now comes Apple and totally changes the game. Many of the phone makers and OS providers (Ballmer, RIM) totally ripped on Apple and screamed at the top of their lungs how no one would EVER pay that much for a phone, let alone one with no physical keyboard. MANY whiners on this very board felt the exact same way.
It's no surprise that now that Apple has hit a huge home run in this field that everyone else is playing catch-up and shockingly, making phones / OS very similar to the iPhone. Eating crow is not something they do very well.
For HTC (for example) to claim they've been innovating for 13 years is pure BS. They have shown zero "innovation" before the iPhone was introduced. Their current products just reek of build-as-fast-as-one-can to get it to market in the hopes of getting some of the action. It no where even shows the kind of quality that gives the notion that serious thought to details have been done.
I think we need patent reform. I truly do. But I for one am with Apple on this one. They did a huge amount of R&D and if a maker is shown to be violating it, I hope they get the hammer in hopefully a much more harder way than say Psystar got away with.
I also believe in consumer choice and competition. Those here that worry about Apple succeeding are just being selfish and naive. Without the ability to protect one's investment, there would be no motivation to innovate. We'd still be stuck with Motorola's StarTac phones if that were the case (which IMHO was a very cool phone!).
The 13 years, BS or not, does not cut it anyway. One key patent (#5,481,721) was filed in 1994 and granted fourteen months later.
I don't think so. Without Capitalism or any other form of Monetary System we would be far technologically and socially advanced. There wouldn't be need to make a product with just few features and then hold other features till next year to make profit.
Anyway, too grand to talk about it in AppleInsider.
Whatever you're smoking, put it down. What would be the point in a company making any product?
hey man! what if like, umm, groups of people got together, and like, umm made things for other people, but then traded those things for items of value that equaled the product as well as the time and effort put into making that product. Like wooooah man I just destroyed capitalism!
I find it funny How many people are saying it is lame or bad for humanity that Apple should defend its patent. Apparently they don?t understand why we have patents to begin with. How is HTC stealing Apples ideas for profit helping humanity? Wouldn?t humanity and consumers be better served if they developed new ideas to solve problems so that we all would have more choices? They can always fall back on Apples ideas in 20 years when patents expires. In the meanwhile, Apples ability to profit off its patents is what encourages them to spend the R&D money to develop new technologies that ultimately push us all forward. Without that protection to profit for 20 years, there would be no incentives for that expenditure.
Hey, some common sense.
Welcome to AI, where you'll often find that trait somewhat lacking - both for and against Apple.
It is about time that Apple made some moves to defend their patents.
It is funny though, how some people here take such a holier than thou attitude about Apple against HTC. Almost as though they don't realize that Apple has 'borrowed' features in the iPhone as well.
What "borrowed" features? Were those features patented? If so, is Apple already paying IP (intellectual property) fees or using components that are already paying IP fees?
Reverse engineer htc devices? Isn't that illegal?
Huh!? Where did you come up with that?
I'm surprised Apple didn't file in the eastern district of Texas. If anything, I'd do it just for the humor aspect of it.
The eastern district of Texas is for shitty patent trolls.
If anything this adds some kind of weight and credibility to Apple's case as they are willing to fight it more on its merits.
I also believe in consumer choice and competition. Those here that worry about Apple succeeding are just being selfish and naive. Without the ability to protect one's investment, there would be no motivation to innovate. We'd still be stuck with Motorola's StarTac phones if that were the case (which IMHO was a very cool phone!).
Exactly, and with all that consumer choice and competition, they have chosen the iPhone. The sane man's choice. I'm with you 100% on your posting.
Such as patents that Palm holds. A couple examples:
#7,268,775 "Dynamic brightness range for portable computer displays based on ambient conditions" i.e. using ambient light sensors to adjust display brightness, a la iPhone.
#7,007,239, "Method and apparatus for accessing a contacts database and telephone services" i.e. phone.app including buttons in the phone.app UI to bring up contacts, history, etc. In fact the diagram in the Palm patent submission is almost a diagram of the iPhone phone UI but was from 2006.
That's just two. Palm has something like 1500 patents in their portfolio for mobiles.
Seriously, why do you think Apple hasn't sued Palm? The resulting counter suits from Palm, if successful (and likely they would be) would gut much of the basic elements of the iPhone experience.
Do you know that Apple uses the Palm patented technique in either case? Did you consider that there's more than one way to use light sensors to adjust display brightness? Does the 239 patent involve multi-touch in accessing the database and services?
I don't know why Apple hasn't sued Palm. For one, maybe Palm found a different, ingenious way to implement multi-touch. Or Apple may sue Palm in about 6 months. After all, it took Apple 1.5 years before suing HTC about the Dream/G1.
Yes, of course they are a legit company.
But you realize that the data are in Taiwan Dollar, surely, and that 1 Taiwan Dollar ≈ US$0.031? So the mkt cap is approximately US$8B.
Wow, that's deflating...
Soooo, if I use my thumb and forefinger to wipe my nose....
Does you noes get bigger? Beware the apple lawyer....
Some people here are probably going to find a way to justify Apple's stiff-arm tactics, and I don't much care what your justifications are. They are stifling innovation, period. For me, its HTC all the way from now on.
How does it stifle innovation?
Assuming HTC is guilty (which they might not be), wouldn't we all be better off it HTC found another, hopefully better, faster, efficient, way to implement an objects, multi-touch, power saving, etc? How does it advance technology for them to do it the exact same way?
Judge: Can you explain this HTC?
HTC: Your Honor, I’m going to demonstrate how our software differs from the iDont. I’m launching Pandora now… Can you hear the music? I’m now going to check my email.. Do you still hear the music?? Now I’m launching the Web Browser.. Can you still hear the music???
Judge: Case closed!!
Of course you're describing Microsoft and Google software there aren't you.
Come back when you have a clue. The fact that both WinMo and Android-based HTC phones are being targeted, suggests that it is something specific about HTC's handsets, such as the Sense UI maybe?
Seriously, why do you think Apple hasn't sued Palm? The resulting counter suits from Palm, if successful (and likely they would be) would gut much of the basic elements of the iPhone experience.
Nah !! Palm's dead anyway. Why waste money on suing Palm? Apple wants to hobble Google and the Androidies. When Palm is on its last legs, Apple will just buy their patent portfolio. And bury Web OS.
And how exactly would Apple know such a thing? Reverse engineer htc devices? Isn't that illegal?
If they didn't, then aren't they going out on a limb and guessing the same methods are used?
Reverse engineering isn't illegal. There's no DMCA issue involved here.
And don't you think Apple (and every corporation with a significant set of patents) has a department that takes apart and tests devices from other companies?