That comment goes a bit far, but the concept is right on the money.
10 years ago, Microsoft was the big mean bully and now it's undeniably Apple while Bill Gates forks over money to starving kids in Africa as fast as it can.
Apple will continue to be immensely profitable, but it will never hold down a majority marketshare for an extended period of time in computing devices. Their bully attitude either scares off customers, or it invites antitrust investigations. In this case it's highly likely to result in patent reform, given the absurdity of the patents here.
This was a monstrous mistake by Apple and it's doing a ton of damage to its image outside of the "fan" community. If you read mainstream media article comments, they're overwhelmingly incredulous that Apple would stoop to such lows.
Apple makes killer products. All it needs to do is make them. Stuff like this makes people increasingly philosophically against Apple, because it makes it look like if Apple had its way, you would have to buy their products. Rather than competing in the marketplace, they're trying to drive everyone else out of the market with underhanded tactics.
I know almost everyone here won't see it like that, but that's the point. People here won't. "Fans" won't. Apple will always have a dedicated fanbase that loyally buys its products. Where Apple has repeatedly fallen down in the past is getting mainstream acceptance. The iPod was a success because it was decidedly pro-consumer -- it made everything easy, they pushed to remove DRM, there was nothing else in the same league and they kept it one step a head not by litigation, but innovation.
Somewhere along the way they've lost it. Now they're litigating while innovation is stagnating (relative to Apple's standards, not industry). Their devices are increasingly becoming hostile to the consumer with the App Store restrictions, publisher bullying (eg, Kindle fiasco), crusades against jailbreaking, having cool features that only work within the Apple ecosystem, etc. There's nothing criminal about this, to be sure -- but it's also a sure fire way to maneuver yourself out of a majority marketshare position. We saw it with smartphones, and we will see it with tablets as well.
But maybe Apple is okay with that. Apple is immensely and astonishingly profitable. Good for them, if so. But that still makes them a bunch of dicks for trying to restrict consumer choice in the marketplace with an army of lawyers.
How can you say that Apple is immensely profitable in one sentence but yet continue on your merry way with stuff like, "Their bully attitude either scares off customers", and, "Stuff like this makes people increasingly philosophically against Apple".
Do you not read anything besides anti-Apple crap. Have you had a look at Apple's last quarterly financials to see the number of products they sell. Did you not notice the stories about the long line-ups of people wanting to buy Apple products. Does Apple really look that unpopular to you.
FFS, man... retool, rethink... it's not really that bad to like Apple.
How can you say that Apple is immensely profitable in one sentence but yet continue on your merry way with stuff like, "Their bully attitude either scares off customers", and, "Stuff like this makes people increasingly philosophically against Apple".
Do you not read anything besides anti-Apple crap. Have you had a look at Apple's last quarterly financials to see the number of products they sell. Did you not notice the stories about the long line-ups of people wanting to buy Apple products. Does Apple really look that unpopular to you.
FFS, man... retool, rethink... it's not really that bad to like Apple.
Yogi Berra: "No one goes there any more. It's too crowded."
And what the hell does this have to do with anything? It is a photo frame not a tablet.
No description is necessary in the "community design". If it has a rectangular flat surface with the screen in the middle, the court can bar the sale of the infringing product.
No surprise here. I've recently started reading Android related blogs and forums.
Stories are always spun to be pro Android. Everyone else is wrong... especially, Apple.
A common thread now is that Apple must litigate, since it cannot compete / innovate in the marketplace.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asherian
That comment goes a bit far, but the concept is right on the money.
10 years ago, Microsoft was the big mean bully and now it's undeniably Apple while Bill Gates forks over money to starving kids in Africa as fast as it can.
Apple will continue to be immensely profitable, but it will never hold down a majority marketshare for an extended period of time in computing devices. Their bully attitude either scares off customers, or it invites antitrust investigations. In this case it's highly likely to result in patent reform, given the absurdity of the patents here.
This was a monstrous mistake by Apple and it's doing a ton of damage to its image outside of the "fan" community. If you read mainstream media article comments, they're overwhelmingly incredulous that Apple would stoop to such lows.
Apple makes killer products. All it needs to do is make them. Stuff like this makes people increasingly philosophically against Apple, because it makes it look like if Apple had its way, you would have to buy their products. Rather than competing in the marketplace, they're trying to drive everyone else out of the market with underhanded tactics.
I know almost everyone here won't see it like that, but that's the point. People here won't. "Fans" won't. Apple will always have a dedicated fanbase that loyally buys its products. Where Apple has repeatedly fallen down in the past is getting mainstream acceptance. The iPod was a success because it was decidedly pro-consumer -- it made everything easy, they pushed to remove DRM, there was nothing else in the same league and they kept it one step a head not by litigation, but innovation.
Somewhere along the way they've lost it. Now they're litigating while innovation is stagnating (relative to Apple's standards, not industry). Their devices are increasingly becoming hostile to the consumer with the App Store restrictions, publisher bullying (eg, Kindle fiasco), crusades against jailbreaking, having cool features that only work within the Apple ecosystem, etc. There's nothing criminal about this, to be sure -- but it's also a sure fire way to maneuver yourself out of a majority marketshare position. We saw it with smartphones, and we will see it with tablets as well.
But maybe Apple is okay with that. Apple is immensely and astonishingly profitable. Good for them, if so. But that still makes them a bunch of dicks for trying to restrict consumer choice in the marketplace with an army of lawyers.
Did you actually read your drivel before posting it. If you actually believe what you posted then you have some serious issues you need to get help with.
If this report is true.... How is this Blog any more valid than the last report from Samsung????
Actually the thing I really like about Dilger is that he does indeed do research so I'm more willing to believe this article than some company who can't even do a decent job of copying something.
Sometimes with these really big companies it's hard to know if they're deliberately being misleading, or if it's just the left hand not talking to the right hand. You have to look at their past behaviour, and in this case you have the copying...
As with all things (people, companies, politicians, etc.) you need to pay attention to what they do -- and question what they say...
No description is necessary in the "community design". If it has a rectangular flat surface with the screen in the middle, the court can bar the sale of the infringing product.
You're wrong as usual, but if you're right then Samsung is doomed to fail in the EU tablet market - so that's funny - you accidentally argued that Samsung is going to fail
You're wrong as usual, but if you're right then Samsung is doomed to fail in the EU tablet market - so that's funny - you accidentally argued that Samsung is going to fail
That comment goes a bit far, but the concept is right on the money.
10 years ago, Microsoft was the big mean bully and now it's undeniably Apple while Bill Gates forks over money to starving kids in Africa as fast as it can.
Apple will continue to be immensely profitable, but it will never hold down a majority marketshare for an extended period of time in computing devices. Their bully attitude either scares off customers, or it invites antitrust investigations. In this case it's highly likely to result in patent reform, given the absurdity of the patents here.
This was a monstrous mistake by Apple and it's doing a ton of damage to its image outside of the "fan" community. If you read mainstream media article comments, they're overwhelmingly incredulous that Apple would stoop to such lows.
Apple makes killer products. All it needs to do is make them. Stuff like this makes people increasingly philosophically against Apple, because it makes it look like if Apple had its way, you would have to buy their products. Rather than competing in the marketplace, they're trying to drive everyone else out of the market with underhanded tactics.
I know almost everyone here won't see it like that, but that's the point. People here won't. "Fans" won't. Apple will always have a dedicated fanbase that loyally buys its products. Where Apple has repeatedly fallen down in the past is getting mainstream acceptance. The iPod was a success because it was decidedly pro-consumer -- it made everything easy, they pushed to remove DRM, there was nothing else in the same league and they kept it one step a head not by litigation, but innovation.
Somewhere along the way they've lost it. Now they're litigating while innovation is stagnating (relative to Apple's standards, not industry). Their devices are increasingly becoming hostile to the consumer with the App Store restrictions, publisher bullying (eg, Kindle fiasco), crusades against jailbreaking, having cool features that only work within the Apple ecosystem, etc. There's nothing criminal about this, to be sure -- but it's also a sure fire way to maneuver yourself out of a majority marketshare position. We saw it with smartphones, and we will see it with tablets as well.
But maybe Apple is okay with that. Apple is immensely and astonishingly profitable. Good for them, if so. But that still makes them a bunch of dicks for trying to restrict consumer choice in the marketplace with an army of lawyers.
Complete and utter BS. You people are making it sound as though Apple hired a bunch of henchmen and told them to go and threaten the families of competitors' executives. Apple went through perfectly legal means. An impartial judge decided in Apple's favor.
If you invested your resources on making something successful, you would be just as pissed if someone else piggybacked off of your success. What incentive would you have to invest your resources into making something successful a second time around only to watch someone else just rip it off and make money off of it? If someone is stealing what you duly acquired, you have every right to seek redress in court. That's why the remark that Apple would "litigate rather than innovate" is nothing more than a petty attempt to curry favor in the court of public opinion. If someone is just going to rip off your idea time and time again, trying to out-innovate them isn't going to work because all those resources that you invested in coming up with that idea have gone to waste.
Also, business is a cut-throat game, simple as that. In fact, now that you mention Microsoft, you might not know this, but Bill Gates sent an internal memo to the Microsoft Office team saying that they had to lock people into Internet Explorer's proprietary APIs and prevent them from being able to render Office documents in other browser, because that would destroy their business. How's that for "restricting consumer choice?" And Microsoft commands the largest market share in PCs. I'd like to see you call Microsoft a bunch of dicks, but I suppose Bill Gates gets a pass.
This is a Samsung digital photo frame from 2006. It looks just like a Galaxy Tab 10.1, only with a smaller screen.
Actually that's a render of what engadget thought the product might look like. If you can find a picture of the actual product that would be interesting.
The only ones I can see that look even remotely like the iPad are from 2009. They have far sharper corners, they have a row of buttons down the side, they have a completely different profile. They are the 800W and the 1000W.
Also Apple's community design is dated 2004, so even a 2006 product wouldn't be enough to get them a prior art.
Complete and utter BS. You people are making it sound as though Apple hired a bunch of henchmen and told them to go and threaten the families of competitors' executives. Apple went through perfectly legal means. An impartial judge decided in Apple's favor.
If you invested your resources on making something successful, you would be just as pissed if someone else piggybacked off of your success. What incentive would you have to invest your resources into making something successful a second time around only to watch someone else just rip it off and make money off of it? If someone is stealing what you duly acquired, you have every right to seek redress in court. That's why the remark that Apple would "litigate rather than innovate" is nothing more than a petty attempt to curry favor in the court of public opinion. If someone is just going to rip off your idea time and time again, trying to out-innovate them isn't going to work because all those resources that you invested in coming up with that idea have gone to waste.
Also, business is a cut-throat game, simple as that. In fact, now that you mention Microsoft, you might not know this, but Bill Gates sent an internal memo to the Microsoft Office team saying that they had to lock people into Internet Explorer's proprietary APIs and prevent them from being able to render Office documents in other browser, because that would destroy their business. How's that for "restricting consumer choice?" And Microsoft commands the largest market share in PCs. I'd like to see you call Microsoft a bunch of dicks, but I suppose Bill Gates gets a pass.
I think many people with a vested interest are taking this opportunity to shout down or badmouth Apple simply because it's a rare opportunity for them to use or cite something to this effect. The man on the street either wont know or won't care about what's going on and Apple will continue to make great products and consumers will continue to lap them up.
The man on the street either wont know or won't care about what's going on and Apple will continue to make great products and consumers will continue to lap them up.
I dunno, I have met a few people who dont want to purchase an ipad because its apple. I work with one who used to own an iphone, but no longer.
Wether this actuall results in them buying the oppositions tablets is a differnet story, as a tablet is an additional device for most people.
I dunno, I have met a few people who dont want to purchase an ipad because its apple. I work with one who used to own an iphone, but no longer.
Wether this actuall results in them buying the oppositions tablets is a differnet story, as a tablet is an additional device for most people.
It's part of being so successful and becoming mainstream - there are plenty of people who dislike Apple product simply because of their success over the last 10 years. They dislike seeing white headphone cords everywhere and so forth, call the people who wear them mindless followers (the irony!). Becoming the world's "biggest" company will only reinforce this.
It's part of being so successful and becoming mainstream - there are plenty of people who dislike Apple product simply because of their success over the last 10 years. They dislike seeing white headphone cords everywhere and so forth, call the people who wear them mindless followers (the irony!). Becoming the world's "biggest" company will only reinforce this.
So these people don't buy gasoline because Exxon-Mobil's so successful? It's abject nonsense on their part.
So these people don't buy gasoline because Exxon-Mobil's so successful? It's abject nonsense on their part.
If someone wants to fork over his/her hard earned cash to a company for the "privilege" of another company to record and sell all of his/her personal data to the highest bidder, I certainly will not try to convince the person otherwise since there is a sucker born every minute.
It's part of being so successful and becoming mainstream - there are plenty of people who dislike Apple product simply because of their success over the last 10 years. They dislike seeing white headphone cords everywhere and so forth, call the people who wear them mindless followers (the irony!). Becoming the world's "biggest" company will only reinforce this.
I'm willing to bet there are more people who have an illogical hatred for all things NOT Apple than there are people who have an illogical hatred for all things Apple.
It's part of being so successful and becoming mainstream - there are plenty of people who dislike Apple product simply because of their success over the last 10 years. They dislike seeing white headphone cords everywhere and so forth, call the people who wear them mindless followers (the irony!). Becoming the world's "biggest" company will only reinforce this.
also people call people who are foaming at the mouth about Apple mindless followers because a LOT of them ARE mindless followers.
Think of this. If the iPhone 5 got a 4 inch screen how many people will clamor over Apple's decision to do so? It'll be great, it'll be magical (and no doubt amongst the best screens available but that's besides the point) but when Jobs mentioned that no one wants 4in screens how many people mindlessly agreed with him?
There ARE mindless haters of Apple out there, I'm not doubting you there. But being that there are few companies that create a cult-like experience (I can't recall any besides Apple) no other companies cater to such mindlessness.
For instance...I haven't seen one (or more than one) Apple fan on this site object to the design patent that Apple is waving towards Samsung (understandably IMO) and...Motorola!!?? But I have seen many Android fans happy that Apple is telling Samsung to stop semi-copying and be a bit more unique (I'm one of them).
Comments
That comment goes a bit far, but the concept is right on the money.
10 years ago, Microsoft was the big mean bully and now it's undeniably Apple while Bill Gates forks over money to starving kids in Africa as fast as it can.
Apple will continue to be immensely profitable, but it will never hold down a majority marketshare for an extended period of time in computing devices. Their bully attitude either scares off customers, or it invites antitrust investigations. In this case it's highly likely to result in patent reform, given the absurdity of the patents here.
This was a monstrous mistake by Apple and it's doing a ton of damage to its image outside of the "fan" community. If you read mainstream media article comments, they're overwhelmingly incredulous that Apple would stoop to such lows.
Apple makes killer products. All it needs to do is make them. Stuff like this makes people increasingly philosophically against Apple, because it makes it look like if Apple had its way, you would have to buy their products. Rather than competing in the marketplace, they're trying to drive everyone else out of the market with underhanded tactics.
I know almost everyone here won't see it like that, but that's the point. People here won't. "Fans" won't. Apple will always have a dedicated fanbase that loyally buys its products. Where Apple has repeatedly fallen down in the past is getting mainstream acceptance. The iPod was a success because it was decidedly pro-consumer -- it made everything easy, they pushed to remove DRM, there was nothing else in the same league and they kept it one step a head not by litigation, but innovation.
Somewhere along the way they've lost it. Now they're litigating while innovation is stagnating (relative to Apple's standards, not industry). Their devices are increasingly becoming hostile to the consumer with the App Store restrictions, publisher bullying (eg, Kindle fiasco), crusades against jailbreaking, having cool features that only work within the Apple ecosystem, etc. There's nothing criminal about this, to be sure -- but it's also a sure fire way to maneuver yourself out of a majority marketshare position. We saw it with smartphones, and we will see it with tablets as well.
But maybe Apple is okay with that. Apple is immensely and astonishingly profitable. Good for them, if so. But that still makes them a bunch of dicks for trying to restrict consumer choice in the marketplace with an army of lawyers.
How can you say that Apple is immensely profitable in one sentence but yet continue on your merry way with stuff like, "Their bully attitude either scares off customers", and, "Stuff like this makes people increasingly philosophically against Apple".
Do you not read anything besides anti-Apple crap. Have you had a look at Apple's last quarterly financials to see the number of products they sell. Did you not notice the stories about the long line-ups of people wanting to buy Apple products. Does Apple really look that unpopular to you.
FFS, man... retool, rethink... it's not really that bad to like Apple.
How can you say that Apple is immensely profitable in one sentence but yet continue on your merry way with stuff like, "Their bully attitude either scares off customers", and, "Stuff like this makes people increasingly philosophically against Apple".
Do you not read anything besides anti-Apple crap. Have you had a look at Apple's last quarterly financials to see the number of products they sell. Did you not notice the stories about the long line-ups of people wanting to buy Apple products. Does Apple really look that unpopular to you.
FFS, man... retool, rethink... it's not really that bad to like Apple.
Yogi Berra: "No one goes there any more. It's too crowded."
This is a Samsung digital photo frame from 2006. It looks just like a Galaxy Tab 10.1, only with a smaller screen.
And what the hell does this have to do with anything? It is a photo frame not a tablet.
And what the hell does this have to do with anything? It is a photo frame not a tablet.
No description is necessary in the "community design". If it has a rectangular flat surface with the screen in the middle, the court can bar the sale of the infringing product.
No surprise here. I've recently started reading Android related blogs and forums.
Stories are always spun to be pro Android. Everyone else is wrong... especially, Apple.
A common thread now is that Apple must litigate, since it cannot compete / innovate in the marketplace.
That comment goes a bit far, but the concept is right on the money.
10 years ago, Microsoft was the big mean bully and now it's undeniably Apple while Bill Gates forks over money to starving kids in Africa as fast as it can.
Apple will continue to be immensely profitable, but it will never hold down a majority marketshare for an extended period of time in computing devices. Their bully attitude either scares off customers, or it invites antitrust investigations. In this case it's highly likely to result in patent reform, given the absurdity of the patents here.
This was a monstrous mistake by Apple and it's doing a ton of damage to its image outside of the "fan" community. If you read mainstream media article comments, they're overwhelmingly incredulous that Apple would stoop to such lows.
Apple makes killer products. All it needs to do is make them. Stuff like this makes people increasingly philosophically against Apple, because it makes it look like if Apple had its way, you would have to buy their products. Rather than competing in the marketplace, they're trying to drive everyone else out of the market with underhanded tactics.
I know almost everyone here won't see it like that, but that's the point. People here won't. "Fans" won't. Apple will always have a dedicated fanbase that loyally buys its products. Where Apple has repeatedly fallen down in the past is getting mainstream acceptance. The iPod was a success because it was decidedly pro-consumer -- it made everything easy, they pushed to remove DRM, there was nothing else in the same league and they kept it one step a head not by litigation, but innovation.
Somewhere along the way they've lost it. Now they're litigating while innovation is stagnating (relative to Apple's standards, not industry). Their devices are increasingly becoming hostile to the consumer with the App Store restrictions, publisher bullying (eg, Kindle fiasco), crusades against jailbreaking, having cool features that only work within the Apple ecosystem, etc. There's nothing criminal about this, to be sure -- but it's also a sure fire way to maneuver yourself out of a majority marketshare position. We saw it with smartphones, and we will see it with tablets as well.
But maybe Apple is okay with that. Apple is immensely and astonishingly profitable. Good for them, if so. But that still makes them a bunch of dicks for trying to restrict consumer choice in the marketplace with an army of lawyers.
Did you actually read your drivel before posting it. If you actually believe what you posted then you have some serious issues you need to get help with.
If this report is true.... How is this Blog any more valid than the last report from Samsung????
Actually the thing I really like about Dilger is that he does indeed do research so I'm more willing to believe this article than some company who can't even do a decent job of copying something.
Sometimes with these really big companies it's hard to know if they're deliberately being misleading, or if it's just the left hand not talking to the right hand. You have to look at their past behaviour, and in this case you have the copying...
As with all things (people, companies, politicians, etc.) you need to pay attention to what they do -- and question what they say...
No description is necessary in the "community design". If it has a rectangular flat surface with the screen in the middle, the court can bar the sale of the infringing product.
You're wrong as usual, but if you're right then Samsung is doomed to fail in the EU tablet market - so that's funny - you accidentally argued that Samsung is going to fail
You're wrong as usual, but if you're right then Samsung is doomed to fail in the EU tablet market - so that's funny - you accidentally argued that Samsung is going to fail
That wasnt an accident. It was intentional.
Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.
That wasnt an accident. It was intentional.
Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.
So you agree that Samsung is going to fail in the tablet market? Yikes, your employers aren't going to be happy with that.
That comment goes a bit far, but the concept is right on the money.
10 years ago, Microsoft was the big mean bully and now it's undeniably Apple while Bill Gates forks over money to starving kids in Africa as fast as it can.
Apple will continue to be immensely profitable, but it will never hold down a majority marketshare for an extended period of time in computing devices. Their bully attitude either scares off customers, or it invites antitrust investigations. In this case it's highly likely to result in patent reform, given the absurdity of the patents here.
This was a monstrous mistake by Apple and it's doing a ton of damage to its image outside of the "fan" community. If you read mainstream media article comments, they're overwhelmingly incredulous that Apple would stoop to such lows.
Apple makes killer products. All it needs to do is make them. Stuff like this makes people increasingly philosophically against Apple, because it makes it look like if Apple had its way, you would have to buy their products. Rather than competing in the marketplace, they're trying to drive everyone else out of the market with underhanded tactics.
I know almost everyone here won't see it like that, but that's the point. People here won't. "Fans" won't. Apple will always have a dedicated fanbase that loyally buys its products. Where Apple has repeatedly fallen down in the past is getting mainstream acceptance. The iPod was a success because it was decidedly pro-consumer -- it made everything easy, they pushed to remove DRM, there was nothing else in the same league and they kept it one step a head not by litigation, but innovation.
Somewhere along the way they've lost it. Now they're litigating while innovation is stagnating (relative to Apple's standards, not industry). Their devices are increasingly becoming hostile to the consumer with the App Store restrictions, publisher bullying (eg, Kindle fiasco), crusades against jailbreaking, having cool features that only work within the Apple ecosystem, etc. There's nothing criminal about this, to be sure -- but it's also a sure fire way to maneuver yourself out of a majority marketshare position. We saw it with smartphones, and we will see it with tablets as well.
But maybe Apple is okay with that. Apple is immensely and astonishingly profitable. Good for them, if so. But that still makes them a bunch of dicks for trying to restrict consumer choice in the marketplace with an army of lawyers.
Complete and utter BS. You people are making it sound as though Apple hired a bunch of henchmen and told them to go and threaten the families of competitors' executives. Apple went through perfectly legal means. An impartial judge decided in Apple's favor.
If you invested your resources on making something successful, you would be just as pissed if someone else piggybacked off of your success. What incentive would you have to invest your resources into making something successful a second time around only to watch someone else just rip it off and make money off of it? If someone is stealing what you duly acquired, you have every right to seek redress in court. That's why the remark that Apple would "litigate rather than innovate" is nothing more than a petty attempt to curry favor in the court of public opinion. If someone is just going to rip off your idea time and time again, trying to out-innovate them isn't going to work because all those resources that you invested in coming up with that idea have gone to waste.
Also, business is a cut-throat game, simple as that. In fact, now that you mention Microsoft, you might not know this, but Bill Gates sent an internal memo to the Microsoft Office team saying that they had to lock people into Internet Explorer's proprietary APIs and prevent them from being able to render Office documents in other browser, because that would destroy their business. How's that for "restricting consumer choice?" And Microsoft commands the largest market share in PCs. I'd like to see you call Microsoft a bunch of dicks, but I suppose Bill Gates gets a pass.
This is a Samsung digital photo frame from 2006. It looks just like a Galaxy Tab 10.1, only with a smaller screen.
Actually that's a render of what engadget thought the product might look like. If you can find a picture of the actual product that would be interesting.
The only ones I can see that look even remotely like the iPad are from 2009. They have far sharper corners, they have a row of buttons down the side, they have a completely different profile. They are the 800W and the 1000W.
Also Apple's community design is dated 2004, so even a 2006 product wouldn't be enough to get them a prior art.
Someone should change their handle to "Iamwrong"
And what the hell does this have to do with anything? It is a photo frame not a tablet.
Nothing. The actual product he's referring to looks like this:
http://www.samsung.com/ae/consumer/c...ype=prd_detail
Complete and utter BS. You people are making it sound as though Apple hired a bunch of henchmen and told them to go and threaten the families of competitors' executives. Apple went through perfectly legal means. An impartial judge decided in Apple's favor.
If you invested your resources on making something successful, you would be just as pissed if someone else piggybacked off of your success. What incentive would you have to invest your resources into making something successful a second time around only to watch someone else just rip it off and make money off of it? If someone is stealing what you duly acquired, you have every right to seek redress in court. That's why the remark that Apple would "litigate rather than innovate" is nothing more than a petty attempt to curry favor in the court of public opinion. If someone is just going to rip off your idea time and time again, trying to out-innovate them isn't going to work because all those resources that you invested in coming up with that idea have gone to waste.
Also, business is a cut-throat game, simple as that. In fact, now that you mention Microsoft, you might not know this, but Bill Gates sent an internal memo to the Microsoft Office team saying that they had to lock people into Internet Explorer's proprietary APIs and prevent them from being able to render Office documents in other browser, because that would destroy their business. How's that for "restricting consumer choice?" And Microsoft commands the largest market share in PCs. I'd like to see you call Microsoft a bunch of dicks, but I suppose Bill Gates gets a pass.
I think many people with a vested interest are taking this opportunity to shout down or badmouth Apple simply because it's a rare opportunity for them to use or cite something to this effect. The man on the street either wont know or won't care about what's going on and Apple will continue to make great products and consumers will continue to lap them up.
The man on the street either wont know or won't care about what's going on and Apple will continue to make great products and consumers will continue to lap them up.
I dunno, I have met a few people who dont want to purchase an ipad because its apple. I work with one who used to own an iphone, but no longer.
Wether this actuall results in them buying the oppositions tablets is a differnet story, as a tablet is an additional device for most people.
I dunno, I have met a few people who dont want to purchase an ipad because its apple. I work with one who used to own an iphone, but no longer.
Wether this actuall results in them buying the oppositions tablets is a differnet story, as a tablet is an additional device for most people.
It's part of being so successful and becoming mainstream - there are plenty of people who dislike Apple product simply because of their success over the last 10 years. They dislike seeing white headphone cords everywhere and so forth, call the people who wear them mindless followers (the irony!). Becoming the world's "biggest" company will only reinforce this.
It's part of being so successful and becoming mainstream - there are plenty of people who dislike Apple product simply because of their success over the last 10 years. They dislike seeing white headphone cords everywhere and so forth, call the people who wear them mindless followers (the irony!). Becoming the world's "biggest" company will only reinforce this.
So these people don't buy gasoline because Exxon-Mobil's so successful? It's abject nonsense on their part.
So these people don't buy gasoline because Exxon-Mobil's so successful? It's abject nonsense on their part.
If someone wants to fork over his/her hard earned cash to a company for the "privilege" of another company to record and sell all of his/her personal data to the highest bidder, I certainly will not try to convince the person otherwise since there is a sucker born every minute.
It's part of being so successful and becoming mainstream - there are plenty of people who dislike Apple product simply because of their success over the last 10 years. They dislike seeing white headphone cords everywhere and so forth, call the people who wear them mindless followers (the irony!). Becoming the world's "biggest" company will only reinforce this.
I'm willing to bet there are more people who have an illogical hatred for all things NOT Apple than there are people who have an illogical hatred for all things Apple.
It's part of being so successful and becoming mainstream - there are plenty of people who dislike Apple product simply because of their success over the last 10 years. They dislike seeing white headphone cords everywhere and so forth, call the people who wear them mindless followers (the irony!). Becoming the world's "biggest" company will only reinforce this.
also people call people who are foaming at the mouth about Apple mindless followers because a LOT of them ARE mindless followers.
Think of this. If the iPhone 5 got a 4 inch screen how many people will clamor over Apple's decision to do so? It'll be great, it'll be magical (and no doubt amongst the best screens available but that's besides the point) but when Jobs mentioned that no one wants 4in screens how many people mindlessly agreed with him?
There ARE mindless haters of Apple out there, I'm not doubting you there. But being that there are few companies that create a cult-like experience (I can't recall any besides Apple) no other companies cater to such mindlessness.
For instance...I haven't seen one (or more than one) Apple fan on this site object to the design patent that Apple is waving towards Samsung (understandably IMO) and...Motorola!!?? But I have seen many Android fans happy that Apple is telling Samsung to stop semi-copying and be a bit more unique (I'm one of them).