Nokia uses the DATA channel to push voice over with it's "Push to Talk" service.
This is a different kettle of fish altogether, using the VOICE channel to push data over.
jahonnen is wrong.
This is novel and can be used on a CDMA network to enable voice AND data at the same time.
I'm very well aware that PoC is voice over data. That wasn't my point.
What I was referring to was that the patent seems to talk about using SMS-to-voice and pushing that over a voice channel for "walkie-talkie"-type burst. PoC is a voice channel with walkie-talkie type functionality.
PoC uses data as transport, but that's even better as the cost for voice over data can be significantly smaller (especially if you have flat-rate data plans). In PoC, the phone doesn't ring either. I guess Nextel is similar? PoC is also very efficient
The CDMA Voice channel sounds like a point. I see the voice channel argument valid in cases where the voice channel is cheaper then a data channel. If not Apple could just create an App that's running in the background. The message would be sent (via the data channels) to Apple's own servers , which then directs it to an iPhone receiver running the same app and the receiving app reads it out loud? Pretty much the same result? Do existing IM apps already do something like that?
With many things Apple, there's something more than meets the eye here and it is interesting to try to find out what.
So Apple sues because HTC's devices are too similar, and then turns around and steals Sprint/Nextel's idea? Nice one.
No, no. Apple is preemptively suing. You know that they invent everything. They are just waiting for everyone to use their nonexistent technology so that they can sue them. Look how long it took for Nokia to finally be sued by Apple. How dare Nokia claim to invent GSM technology when everyone knows that Apple invented it first.
Comments
Nothing new???
Nokia uses the DATA channel to push voice over with it's "Push to Talk" service.
This is a different kettle of fish altogether, using the VOICE channel to push data over.
jahonnen is wrong.
This is novel and can be used on a CDMA network to enable voice AND data at the same time.
I'm very well aware that PoC is voice over data. That wasn't my point.
What I was referring to was that the patent seems to talk about using SMS-to-voice and pushing that over a voice channel for "walkie-talkie"-type burst. PoC is a voice channel with walkie-talkie type functionality.
PoC uses data as transport, but that's even better as the cost for voice over data can be significantly smaller (especially if you have flat-rate data plans). In PoC, the phone doesn't ring either. I guess Nextel is similar? PoC is also very efficient
The CDMA Voice channel sounds like a point. I see the voice channel argument valid in cases where the voice channel is cheaper then a data channel. If not Apple could just create an App that's running in the background. The message would be sent (via the data channels) to Apple's own servers , which then directs it to an iPhone receiver running the same app and the receiving app reads it out loud? Pretty much the same result? Do existing IM apps already do something like that?
With many things Apple, there's something more than meets the eye here and it is interesting to try to find out what.
Regs, Jarkko
So Apple sues because HTC's devices are too similar, and then turns around and steals Sprint/Nextel's idea? Nice one.
No, no. Apple is preemptively suing. You know that they invent everything. They are just waiting for everyone to use their nonexistent technology so that they can sue them. Look how long it took for Nokia to finally be sued by Apple. How dare Nokia claim to invent GSM technology when everyone knows that Apple invented it first.