There is nothing "revolutionary" Apple has done at least on the product side.
What they HAVE "revolutionized" is in the way ordinary people now knew of a technology product.
All of this was thanks to Apple's marketing team, aka the fluff.
I guess we can all now figure out why you aren't running a major tech company. Maybe you should brush up on what makes for a revolution and what doesn't.
These are the last bytes on AI's server that I am going to waste on you. I imagine that being a dense prick on the internet provides you with some sick satisfaction, but I'm done being one of your enablers.
Ban away, mods.
Ban me for what now?
Point is you agreed with me that Apple jump started the industry and as always competitors followed suit. Steve on the other hand felt competitors pretty much had no right to take his lead. And doing so was tantamount to grand theft.
So what is it? Grand theft or jump starting/inspiring am industry?
Jobs was willing to sacrifice everything Apple has to destroy Google/Android. That is INSANE. Which makes more sense, to lose some $$$ from sales lost to Google/Android or to potentially bankrupt Apple for the sake of revenge (and yes, it is revenge)?
This, IMO, was serious blind spot of Job's. I also find it bothersome that Apple chooses to sue/attack the manufacturers of Android devices instead of suing Google directly. Attacking Google/Android via proxy seems childish. It seems a way to get revenge on Google and then take out the competition in one fell swoop.
There should be far fewer lawsuits. Apple should be suing Google as well as Samsung (due to other patent violations other than those in Android) NOT companies that choose to sell Android products. Very tacky. I say this as a shareholder (tiny tiny shareholder) and a customer.
This is where Jobs really lost most of his grip on reality. Without Android, we'd prob be stuck with no multitasking, classic garbage notifications and no cloud-like services. If the Android platform were to suddenly fall into the abyss, you clowns would be wise to hope for a new worthy competitor to rise from the ashes.
Haha, the hubris of the fandroid. Wow, you really believe Android is the savior of Apple, huh? Wow, just wow. You obviously hadn't heard Steve Jobs talking about his cloud vision during 1997 WWDC. You just assume that Apple is copying Google's cloud service? I guess you also think Siri is a "copy" of Google Voice. Even more lulz: you think without Google, Apple lacks a "worthy competitor".
Oracle is suing Google because Oracle claims Google is creating and distributing software that violates oracles copyrights and licensing. Oracle is trying to prove that Google coding of the Dalvik JVM directly hurt Oracles Mobile Java licensing.
What surprised me is that Sun did not move on this immediately. When I first saw Android and the Dalvik VM and the use of java (lower case intentionally), I immediately thought "Sun is going to freak over this". I would love to know the details behind that story. Oracle maybe too late taking this up now. If there is an Achille's heal with Android it's Java, IMO, not the UX. Other companies have made their on VMs (like IBM) but with Sun licensing. Even Microsoft was given the boot with their J++ product which was found to violate Sun's licensing.
The Samsung issue must have been especially infuriating since Samsung was making most of the parts for iOS devices.
Just to fuel the flames higher - I ask, if Android phones cost the same or more than the iPhone when bundled with a carrier contract, would it be anywhere near as successful?
..... (In reply to: IKOL) ... Your continued, plainly-displayed, ignorance is so pervasive I am getting to the point of believing you are nothing more than an intentional troll.
Jobs was willing to sacrifice everything Apple has to destroy Google/Android. That is INSANE. Which makes more sense, to lose some $$$ from sales lost to Google/Android or to potentially bankrupt Apple for the sake of revenge (and yes, it is revenge)?
It was never about the money/revenge .... it was about the lack of integrity displayed by Eric S. and Google. Why should Google be rewarded for it's lack of integrity, by Apple just giving up the fight? It is always difficult to put a price on integrity .... especially if one has none, no ?
I guess we can all now figure out why you aren't running a major tech company. Maybe you should brush up on what makes for a revolution and what doesn't.
Are you still droning on about touch screens? The capacitive touch screens are one of the ways Apple set their iPhone apart (unlike that resistive POS you pasted). Were there other phones using capacitive touch? Maybe, but none implemented it in a user-friendly, intuitive, multi-touch manner the way Apple did. No one. You can't say that about Android because there is always the iPhone getting in the way.
I'm talking about the concept of a touch screen + PDA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
I already did.
Ideas can not be legally protected. It is impossible to get a valid copyright, patent, trademark, or design patent on an ideal.
IMPLEMENTATION can be patented, trademarked, copyrighted, etc - so it is legally protectable.
There is nothing legally wrong with using an idea. It IS wrong to use an implementation which is protected by intellectual property laws.
Example:
Idea: connecting devices wirelessly
Implementation: Using a specific circuitry and specific radio wave communication covered by patent xxxxxxxxx.
No you haven't. Your explantion fails. Try harder.
Jobs was willing to sacrifice everything Apple has to destroy Google/Android. That is INSANE. Which makes more sense, to lose some $$$ from sales lost to Google/Android or to potentially bankrupt Apple for the sake of revenge (and yes, it is revenge)?
This, IMO, was serious blind spot of Job's. I also find it bothersome that Apple chooses to sue/attack the manufacturers of Android devices instead of suing Google directly. Attacking Google/Android via proxy seems childish. It seems a way to get revenge on Google and then take out the competition in one fell swoop.
There should be far fewer lawsuits. Apple should be suing Google as well as Samsung (due to other patent violations other than those in Android) NOT companies that choose to sell Android products. Very tacky. I say this as a shareholder (tiny tiny shareholder) and a customer.
With the speed at which Apple was an is making money, spending the reserves the had to defeat Android (thereby increasing revenues even more) wouldn't have bankrupted them, it would have allowed them to replenish those reserves even quicker.
The only reason Android ramped up as quickly as they did is that of all the major competitors, WinMo, Symbian and BB, Android most quickly assimilated and copied what Apple had. If Jobs had managed to kill Android, then that would have been cash in the bank. It isn't hubris to want to kill Android, it is anger of seeing a product Jobs was intimately involved in developing being ripped off blatantly and good business at the same time.
It's not so much people are sitting there chanting he is always right, but they feel the fact that if he says something they think then that somehow validates their thoughts even though his feelings are just that, his.
With the speed at which Apple was an is making money, spending the reserves the had to defeat Android (thereby increasing revenues even more) wouldn't have bankrupted them, it would have allowed them to replenish those reserves even quicker.
The only reason Android ramped up as quickly as they did is that of all the major competitors, WinMo, Symbian and BB, Android most quickly assimilated and copied what Apple had. If Jobs had managed to kill Android, then that would have been cash in the bank. It isn't hubris to want to kill Android, it is anger of seeing a product Jobs was intimately involved in developing being ripped off blatantly.
Yes, because we all know Android and iOS are twins.
The people who have never once said he was wrong about anything?
Haggar, you know am not one that is afraid to call out Apple sheep and have been in many heated discussions with the blind fanboies here. But in this case, defending Jobs attitude of being wronged really isn't difficult. He was right.
Haggar, you know am not one that is afraid to call out Apple sheep and have been in many heated discussions with the blind fanboies here. But in this case, defending Jobs attitude of being wronged really isn't difficult. He was right.
Was he though?
was he wronged? possibly...was he betrayed? not likely.
was he as wronged as he seems to think? (grand theft) not likely.
Think about this...Apple joined the mobile phone game in 2007...not before, not after...2007 (they may have been working on something for a bit longer, but they came to be official in 2007.
Google joined the mobile phone game in 2008...not before...not after...10/21/2008.
Tell me how this quote by Steve makes sense, "We didn?t enter the search market, but they entered the mobile phone market. Don?t be mistaken, they want to kill the iPhone. But we won?t let them" as if Apple had some sort of monopoly over it...as if Google had absolutely NO RIGHT to enter the market...and as if Google, by directly competing in the smartphone market was conspiring to destroy Apple.
Sounds like the ramblings of a paranoid egomaniacal technological genius to me.
Like I said on page one, Steve, as great as the man was and will be remembered as for a LONG time, was still an egomaniac.
Comments
There is nothing "revolutionary" Apple has done at least on the product side.
What they HAVE "revolutionized" is in the way ordinary people now knew of a technology product.
All of this was thanks to Apple's marketing team, aka the fluff.
I guess we can all now figure out why you aren't running a major tech company. Maybe you should brush up on what makes for a revolution and what doesn't.
These are the last bytes on AI's server that I am going to waste on you. I imagine that being a dense prick on the internet provides you with some sick satisfaction, but I'm done being one of your enablers.
Ban away, mods.
Ban me for what now?
Point is you agreed with me that Apple jump started the industry and as always competitors followed suit. Steve on the other hand felt competitors pretty much had no right to take his lead. And doing so was tantamount to grand theft.
So what is it? Grand theft or jump starting/inspiring am industry?
Ban me for what now?
I think he wants to be banned for outright insulting other members.
Jobs was willing to sacrifice everything Apple has to destroy Google/Android. That is INSANE. Which makes more sense, to lose some $$$ from sales lost to Google/Android or to potentially bankrupt Apple for the sake of revenge (and yes, it is revenge)?
This, IMO, was serious blind spot of Job's. I also find it bothersome that Apple chooses to sue/attack the manufacturers of Android devices instead of suing Google directly. Attacking Google/Android via proxy seems childish. It seems a way to get revenge on Google and then take out the competition in one fell swoop.
There should be far fewer lawsuits. Apple should be suing Google as well as Samsung (due to other patent violations other than those in Android) NOT companies that choose to sell Android products. Very tacky. I say this as a shareholder (tiny tiny shareholder) and a customer.
This is where Jobs really lost most of his grip on reality. Without Android, we'd prob be stuck with no multitasking, classic garbage notifications and no cloud-like services. If the Android platform were to suddenly fall into the abyss, you clowns would be wise to hope for a new worthy competitor to rise from the ashes.
Haha, the hubris of the fandroid. Wow, you really believe Android is the savior of Apple, huh? Wow, just wow. You obviously hadn't heard Steve Jobs talking about his cloud vision during 1997 WWDC. You just assume that Apple is copying Google's cloud service? I guess you also think Siri is a "copy" of Google Voice. Even more lulz: you think without Google, Apple lacks a "worthy competitor".
Oracle is suing Google because Oracle claims Google is creating and distributing software that violates oracles copyrights and licensing. Oracle is trying to prove that Google coding of the Dalvik JVM directly hurt Oracles Mobile Java licensing.
What surprised me is that Sun did not move on this immediately. When I first saw Android and the Dalvik VM and the use of java (lower case intentionally), I immediately thought "Sun is going to freak over this". I would love to know the details behind that story. Oracle maybe too late taking this up now. If there is an Achille's heal with Android it's Java, IMO, not the UX. Other companies have made their on VMs (like IBM) but with Sun licensing. Even Microsoft was given the boot with their J++ product which was found to violate Sun's licensing.
The Samsung issue must have been especially infuriating since Samsung was making most of the parts for iOS devices.
Just to fuel the flames higher - I ask, if Android phones cost the same or more than the iPhone when bundled with a carrier contract, would it be anywhere near as successful?
..... (In reply to: IKOL) ... Your continued, plainly-displayed, ignorance is so pervasive I am getting to the point of believing you are nothing more than an intentional troll.
Ya think ?
Jobs was willing to sacrifice everything Apple has to destroy Google/Android. That is INSANE. Which makes more sense, to lose some $$$ from sales lost to Google/Android or to potentially bankrupt Apple for the sake of revenge (and yes, it is revenge)?
It was never about the money/revenge .... it was about the lack of integrity displayed by Eric S. and Google. Why should Google be rewarded for it's lack of integrity, by Apple just giving up the fight? It is always difficult to put a price on integrity .... especially if one has none, no ?
I guess we can all now figure out why you aren't running a major tech company. Maybe you should brush up on what makes for a revolution and what doesn't.
Dont tell me what to do.
Except nope. It pretty much entirely hinges on iPhone OS and its ability to do what no other system prior had.
Palm had apps.
Palm had phone capability.
Palm had PDA functionality.
Palm had web browser capability.
"no other system prior" is bs.
Are you still droning on about touch screens? The capacitive touch screens are one of the ways Apple set their iPhone apart (unlike that resistive POS you pasted). Were there other phones using capacitive touch? Maybe, but none implemented it in a user-friendly, intuitive, multi-touch manner the way Apple did. No one. You can't say that about Android because there is always the iPhone getting in the way.
I'm talking about the concept of a touch screen + PDA.
I already did.
Ideas can not be legally protected. It is impossible to get a valid copyright, patent, trademark, or design patent on an ideal.
IMPLEMENTATION can be patented, trademarked, copyrighted, etc - so it is legally protectable.
There is nothing legally wrong with using an idea. It IS wrong to use an implementation which is protected by intellectual property laws.
Example:
Idea: connecting devices wirelessly
Implementation: Using a specific circuitry and specific radio wave communication covered by patent xxxxxxxxx.
No you haven't. Your explantion fails. Try harder.
Who said that Steve Jobs was always right?
The people who have never once said he was wrong about anything?
I'm talking about the concept of a touch screen + PDA.
No you haven't. Your explantion fails. Try harder.
Your comprehension fails. Give up.
This type of hubris is what kills companies.
Jobs was willing to sacrifice everything Apple has to destroy Google/Android. That is INSANE. Which makes more sense, to lose some $$$ from sales lost to Google/Android or to potentially bankrupt Apple for the sake of revenge (and yes, it is revenge)?
This, IMO, was serious blind spot of Job's. I also find it bothersome that Apple chooses to sue/attack the manufacturers of Android devices instead of suing Google directly. Attacking Google/Android via proxy seems childish. It seems a way to get revenge on Google and then take out the competition in one fell swoop.
There should be far fewer lawsuits. Apple should be suing Google as well as Samsung (due to other patent violations other than those in Android) NOT companies that choose to sell Android products. Very tacky. I say this as a shareholder (tiny tiny shareholder) and a customer.
With the speed at which Apple was an is making money, spending the reserves the had to defeat Android (thereby increasing revenues even more) wouldn't have bankrupted them, it would have allowed them to replenish those reserves even quicker.
The only reason Android ramped up as quickly as they did is that of all the major competitors, WinMo, Symbian and BB, Android most quickly assimilated and copied what Apple had. If Jobs had managed to kill Android, then that would have been cash in the bank. It isn't hubris to want to kill Android, it is anger of seeing a product Jobs was intimately involved in developing being ripped off blatantly and good business at the same time.
Who said that Steve Jobs was always right?
super late re-reply:
It's not so much people are sitting there chanting he is always right, but they feel the fact that if he says something they think then that somehow validates their thoughts even though his feelings are just that, his.
With the speed at which Apple was an is making money, spending the reserves the had to defeat Android (thereby increasing revenues even more) wouldn't have bankrupted them, it would have allowed them to replenish those reserves even quicker.
The only reason Android ramped up as quickly as they did is that of all the major competitors, WinMo, Symbian and BB, Android most quickly assimilated and copied what Apple had. If Jobs had managed to kill Android, then that would have been cash in the bank. It isn't hubris to want to kill Android, it is anger of seeing a product Jobs was intimately involved in developing being ripped off blatantly.
Yes, because we all know Android and iOS are twins.
I'm talking about the concept of a touch screen + PDA.
Are you still droning on about touch screen which have no similarity to the resistive touch screen iPhones and actual Androids actually use?
The people who have never once said he was wrong about anything?
Haggar, you know am not one that is afraid to call out Apple sheep and have been in many heated discussions with the blind fanboies here. But in this case, defending Jobs attitude of being wronged really isn't difficult. He was right.
Haggar, you know am not one that is afraid to call out Apple sheep and have been in many heated discussions with the blind fanboies here. But in this case, defending Jobs attitude of being wronged really isn't difficult. He was right.
Was he though?
was he wronged? possibly...was he betrayed? not likely.
was he as wronged as he seems to think? (grand theft) not likely.
Think about this...Apple joined the mobile phone game in 2007...not before, not after...2007 (they may have been working on something for a bit longer, but they came to be official in 2007.
Google joined the mobile phone game in 2008...not before...not after...10/21/2008.
Tell me how this quote by Steve makes sense, "We didn?t enter the search market, but they entered the mobile phone market. Don?t be mistaken, they want to kill the iPhone. But we won?t let them" as if Apple had some sort of monopoly over it...as if Google had absolutely NO RIGHT to enter the market...and as if Google, by directly competing in the smartphone market was conspiring to destroy Apple.
Sounds like the ramblings of a paranoid egomaniacal technological genius to me.
Like I said on page one, Steve, as great as the man was and will be remembered as for a LONG time, was still an egomaniac.
A lot of great men are.