Notifications existed long before iOS or Android had them. Why do people still blabber on like Android invented everything? Neither Android or iOS came up with notifications so neither has the right to claim the other "copied" them. Same goes for the developers of MobileNotifier, Notifier Pro, Lockinfo and all the rest of them.
Slooooooow. No crap. When the first smoke signal was sent notifications were invented. The conversation is about how the are presented and how iOS jumped on the android bandwagon regarding the presentation of notifications and how iOS was utterly horrible utilizing notifications and copied Android.
Slooooooow. No crap. When the first smoke signal was sent notifications were invented. The conversation is about how the are presented and how iOS jumped on the android bandwagon regarding the presentation of notifications and how iOS was utterly horrible utilizing notifications and copied Android.
I was referring to how they were presented. Some people need to learn their computer history. I have seen several pieces of software from the early 90's that used drop-down or slide-in notification systems with each notification occupying a single "line". I've even seen character based drop-down "notification windows" doing similar functions on dumb terminals in the 80's. I even remember working on an internal office e-mail system and remember having to code the software to "save" the character contents of the terminal display in order to display something on top, and then be able to "restore" the screen by re-displaying the over-written content.
Doesn't matter is it's swipe down, swipe up or swipe left/right, the concept is till the same. A flying window containing notification events. And it's been around for a long time.
not that it would make any difference, but feel free to donate all your shares of Apple to the Apple Legal Defense fund.
As I said -- you didn't seem to get it the first time -- I woud be happy to donate 0.018315% of my Apple holdings. Tell me to whom and where I should send the check.
Only post it when its relevant and in many cases it is.
Its not relevant in this case. It is a picture frame and this case is about software patents. (none of which seem to apply to the picture frame.) Just an FYI too, the design patents used in the europe cases were all filed in the early 90s. The picture frame has never actually been relevant to anything. It is just super duper extra not relevant here.
You guys can dance around all you want imagining that Google has been some big litigator. Instead it's more of the "we against the world" attitude carried over from back in the day when Apple really was "we against the world". Google hasn't sued Apple. Google hasn't sued Microsoft.
Simply find a case where Google has initiated an IP lawsuit against a competitor. Any competitor will do. There's gotta be several of those over their 15 years of existence considering the attacks they get from all sides. Surely they've at least turned around and filed their own counter-suit IP claims in defense. Even forget an whether IP is involved. Find any lawsuit they've filed against a competitor, just one, and I'll happily acknowledge that I'm wrong.
Buying a company with active litigation going on is not Google suing a competitor.
Selling patents to HTC that are used for HTC defense is not Google suing a competitor.
Announcing they wish to purchase some company who has on-going issues with a competitor is not Google suing a competitor.
Wait until they actually put their name to a lawsuit against Apple, or Microsoft or Oracle or whoever. Then everyone can have a go on how it's proof of how evil Google is, attacking it's rivals in court rather than the marketplace. It will probably happen eventually. I'm shocked Google hasn't done so already with the Microsoft/Apple gang-bang going on. So far not one forum member can find an actual case where they have. Think there might be a reason for that?
I gave you a very, very clear case. You simply chose to ignore it because it does not fit your world view. So Motorola suing Apple as a Google subsidary really does not count to you? That just makes you delusional. Stop fighting for a cause you already lost.
The litigation was not active when the acquisition started, it did not even start until January 2012. Do you really think that litigation was initiated without Google's knowledge? Show me where someone from Motorola was fired for doing that. Have you ever been involved in an acquisition? Things like that simply do not happen. The January lawsuit was a Google lawsuit.
I headed over to Engadget for a few laughs, a site which I rarely visit anymore, because the comment sections are infested with ignorant trash and human garbage, but it was pretty funny and also pretty predictable to read some of the whiny and hateful comments being made by the butthurt Fandroids there. Hopefully there are more bans and injunctions coming in the future, it makes me feel good to see other ignorant people mad.
Agree. Engadget just isn't the same without Topolsky. And Topolsky just isn't the same now that he's a TV personality. Can't say anything too controversial any more.
Anyway, here's to many more Android smackdowns. You know it's going to keep on getting worse and worse for the copycats.
I headed over to Engadget for a few laughs, a site which I rarely visit anymore, because the comment sections are infested with ignorant trash and human garbage, but it was pretty funny and also pretty predictable to read some of the whiny and hateful comments being made by the butthurt Fandroids there. Hopefully there are more bans and injunctions coming in the future, it makes me feel good to see other ignorant people mad.
And have you read the type of comments on Apple Insider? The levels of fanboy-ism here are beyond belief, no other site comes close.
I used to be fanboy for Commodore products back in the day, WHEN I WAS EIGHT YEARS OLD. Then I grew up, and learnt the enjoy good tech whoever made it. It's absurd and moronic to have slavish devotion to global mega companies, as they exist purely to make a profit and couldn't give a damn what any idiotic fanboy thinks or does.
As for Apple vs Google, it's pathetic, childish, and makes them both look terrible in the eyes of consumers. Android is far from being a clone of iOS anymore, but there are certain problems that have common solutions, such as the ability to search using voice. In this case, to be frank, it just looks like Apple are feeling the heat and resorting to dirty tricks. It stinks.
You guys can dance around all you want imagining that Google has been some big litigator. Instead it's more of the "we against the world" attitude carried over from back in the day when Apple really was "we against the world". Google hasn't sued Apple. Google hasn't sued Microsoft.
Simply find a case where Google has initiated an IP lawsuit against a competitor. Any competitor will do. There's gotta be several of those over their 15 years of existence considering the attacks they get from all sides. Surely they've at least turned around and filed their own counter-suit IP claims in defense. Even forget an whether IP is involved. Find any lawsuit they've filed against a competitor, just one, and I'll happily acknowledge that I'm wrong.
Buying a company with active litigation going on is not Google suing a competitor.
Selling patents to HTC that are used for HTC defense is not Google suing a competitor.
Announcing they wish to purchase some company who has on-going issues with a competitor is not Google suing a competitor.
Wait until they actually put their name to a lawsuit against Apple, or Microsoft or Oracle or whoever. Then everyone can have a go on how it's proof of how evil Google is, attacking it's rivals in court rather than the marketplace. It will probably happen eventually. I'm shocked Google hasn't done so already with the Microsoft/Apple gang-bang going on. So far not one forum member can find an actual case where they have. Think there might be a reason for that?
I think you forgot, if Google didn't buy Motorola, Google will be one of Motorola patents infringer.
Really? People are still whining about this picture? It's a resizing issue, nothing more.
No EricTheHalfBee, it is not a resizing issue. Remember the case was a "look and feel" case. Apple presented manipulated image in regard to Samsung Galaxy Tab just to look like IPad, IMO. No one would think they have different ratio. In reality, they are different. iPad is chunky, but Galaxy Tab is much thinner and taller.
If were just a resizing issue as you claim, GT would be much thinner with same height.
And have you read the type of comments on Apple Insider? The levels of fanboy-ism here are beyond belief, no other site comes close.
That's not unexpected on a site that's Apple-centric although there's plenty of Apple bashing going and legit criticism. On a site like Engadget though, they're suppose to be platform agnostic but they have an overriding bottom-llne to promote tech of any kind. Even if Apple had an air-tight case against Samsung or Google, sites like Engadget aren't going to support Apple's legal strategy because it would ultimately mean less tech to promote if Apple were successful. As such, there's precious little objective reporting with respect to these issues. As for myself, while I'm a fan of Apple products, I'm not a fan of their legal strategy because they will almost certainly lose these patent war even if they manage to eek out a few temporary battle victories such as this preliminary injunction. Instead of burning cash up on their lawyers and the court system, I would much rather see them innovating and making substantial improvement to to iOS and iCloud.
Also, when Tim Cook said he hated litigation, he was being disingenuous at best and in fact he is all in on litigation and has every intention to fulfill the thermonuclear legal directives of Steve Jobs. The question though is whether or not Apple is attempting to stop other companies from making knock-offs or are they attempting to stop competitors from making a better mousetrap.
Trust me my phone does not have any lag (yes my Nexus is rooted, but I have not tweaked any yet because I don't need at the moment)
I found that colourfull widgets may cause some lags. So, I removed not soused colourfull widgets from home screen except the stock gallery widget. I use alots of widgets 4 home screen full, but all of them are transparent (glass or smoked glass) except two, a flash light switch and the gallery widget.
You can customise and optimize your requirement with Galaxy Nexus. You don't really need to root. Some people do not care some lags, so they maximize the potential. If you set it just like iPhone, it would not lag, IMO.
So Google is wasting their time with their Jellybean fixing lag via Butter, which according to you is not needed.
That's not unexpected on a site that's Apple-centric although there's plenty of Apple bashing going and legit criticism. On a site like Engadget though, they're suppose to be platform agnostic but they have an overriding bottom-llne to promote tech of any kind. Even if Apple had an air-tight case against Samsung or Google, sites like Engadget aren't going to support Apple's legal strategy because it would ultimately mean less tech to promote if Apple were successful. As such, there's precious little objective reporting with respect to these issues. As for myself, while I'm a fan of Apple products, I'm not a fan of their legal strategy because they will almost certainly lose these patent war even if they manage to eek out a few temporary battle victories such as this preliminary injunction. Instead of burning cash up on their lawyers and the court system, I would much rather see them innovating and making substantial improvement to to iOS and iCloud.
Also, when Tim Cook said he hated litigation, he was being disingenuous at best and in fact he is all in on litigation and has every intention to fulfill the thermonuclear legal directives of Steve Jobs. The question though is whether or not Apple is attempting to stop other companies from making knock-offs or are they attempting to stop competitors from making a better mousetrap.
Get a clue, the one thing Steve Jobs and now Tim Cook hated more than litigation was PEOPLE STEALING THEIR STUFF.
Apple only litigates against people who deserve it, there are plenty of companies that design around Apple's IP and they are not being sued.
Also, when Tim Cook said he hated litigation, he was being disingenuous at best and in fact he is all in on litigation and has every intention to fulfill the thermonuclear legal directives of Steve Jobs. The question though is whether or not Apple is attempting to stop other companies from making knock-offs or are they attempting to stop competitors from making a better mousetrap.
...and there you go. That's the issue with software patents. A company holding the rights may have the honest intent of only protecting their specific innovation in their specific product. Another may have the intent of using vaguely written IP to strongly discourage new entrants and block serious competitors in "their" market, stifling innovation and creative product ideas.
"Wow. those guys really came up with a great idea. Heck of a crew they've got. You have to admire them"
"What they've done has really got me excited about our own product line and has me thinking outside our own box. Take their latest idea"
" While it's a great start, and they should be commended, I don't think they understand where they've limited it. If you begin with what they've done and look at it with (whatever) in mind instead of (whatever) then you could do this. Change the interface to allow (whatever), add the ability to work with the (whatever) as well as tweak the idea that you should be able to (whatever) and you end up with a feature that truly works for a whole range of uses."
Why should thinking about ways to improve another's ideas be stifled by fears that your bigger richer competitor is going to bring every courtroom attack they can. How does it help innovation if your competitor can find one interpretation of some previously unknown software IP claim to see that your "better mousetrap" is banished or at least delayed long enough that your innovative improvements in a device that competitor may not be interested in building anyway don't matter anymore?
...and there you go. That's the issue with software patents. A company holding the rights may have the honest intent of only protecting their specific innovation in their specific product. Another may have the intent of using vaguely written IP to strongly discourage new entrants and block serious competitors in "their" market.
While, another company may, lie, cheat, steal, defraud standards bodies, and pay people like you to come to web sites like this to defend and cover up their actions.
And, I see above you've been promoting that particular fiction, again, that Google isn't wielding standards essential patents, that were pledged to FRAND licensing, like a baseball bat. But, as pointed out, all these Motorola lawsuits are really Google law suits, and we know that Google specifically approved all of them.
Google is a completely dishonest company whose word means nothing. Remember net neutrality, and how fast they sold that out once it was to their advantage? Now we've seen all this double speak on patents (apparently, the reason they bought Motorola wasn't for Moto's patent, but to use Moto as a patent trolling front), where they, again, say one thing and do another. We have impressive claims about Android activations for which there is no corroborating evidence. Basically, Google's word is completely worthless. Don't bother reading their privacy policy because they aren't going to follow it. Careful buying click through ads from them because if they count those like Android activations, you may pay for a lot more traffic than you ever get.
So Google is wasting their time with their Jellybean fixing lag via Butter, which according to you is not needed.
Who is lying, then?
Lying? I don't know but I am not. Probably you did not read me properly. Yes, if you put resource hungry applications, then Galaxy Nexus might lag some as you know it's specs are not top end, not even matched with Galaxy S2. Again, you can optimize it to you requirement. If you want touch experience with less lag like iPhone, then you could do it by customizing Nexus just like iPhone. I think if iOS allows widgets and live wallpapers, iPhone would lag too.
Lying? I don't know but I am not. Probably you did not read me properly. Yes, if you put resource hungry applications, then Galaxy Nexus might lag some as you know it's specs are not top end, not even matched with Galaxy S2. Again, you can optimize it to you requirement. If you want touch experience with less lag like iPhone, then you could do it by customizing Nexus just like iPhone. I think if iOS allows widgets and live wallpapers, iPhone would lag too.
So, you're saying that Android lags because Google made bad engineering choices to allow the OS to get bogged down running non-essential processes and that Apple had good technical reasons for not implementing eye-candy resource hogs? That sounds reasonable.
so true. if there were no android phones you wouldn't have any larger screens, freedom, and for sure apple would have no reason to really improve. thats what got them in trouble long ago. they just kept putting out sh*t, tacking on more and more bloat onto the original mac os.
apple just sees that they are going to have to spend a lot of money and put major effort into keeping the iphone and ios alive and they dont like that. so they litigate. there are no stupid 'home' buttons on the galaxy nexus, it has a much larger screen and Android 4 is clearly not ios other than you use your fingers to manipulate it. it looks better than the iphone and i am glad i have mine and even if apple succeeded in eliminating android (which ain't going to happen) i still would not get an iphone.
i can't believe the number of people on here taking a 'microsoft phone is okay, but android needs to go'. just shows how idiotic they are.
Well, urban anthropologists believe that cell phone display has become, especially for certain subsets of male geeks, a ritualized substitute for penile display, so, bigger is better.
Of course, as usual, screamingfist presents his usual rambling, incoherent arguments that confuse not only facts but time lines and barely maintain any grip on reality.
Lying? I don't know but I am not. Probably you did not read me properly. Yes, if you put resource hungry applications, then Galaxy Nexus might lag some as you know it's specs are not top end, not even matched with Galaxy S2. Again, you can optimize it to you requirement. If you want touch experience with less lag like iPhone, then you could do it by customizing Nexus just like iPhone. I think if iOS allows widgets and live wallpapers, iPhone would lag too.
Wrong.
GOOGLE, you know the ones who bought Android and released it are the ones who claimed butter, a part of Jellybean is specifically being added to address the lag issue inherent to Android due to it being a JVM with no real time access to the custom Linux kernel upon which it runs.
Even the Galaxy S III has this issue, it's only a few tenths of a second but it sure is noticeable.
Hence Google's continuing efforts to address it.
Stop living in denial, it's an inherent flaw no amount of tweaking stuff will get rid of it.
Comments
Slooooooow. No crap. When the first smoke signal was sent notifications were invented. The conversation is about how the are presented and how iOS jumped on the android bandwagon regarding the presentation of notifications and how iOS was utterly horrible utilizing notifications and copied Android.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellacool
Slooooooow. No crap. When the first smoke signal was sent notifications were invented. The conversation is about how the are presented and how iOS jumped on the android bandwagon regarding the presentation of notifications and how iOS was utterly horrible utilizing notifications and copied Android.
I was referring to how they were presented. Some people need to learn their computer history. I have seen several pieces of software from the early 90's that used drop-down or slide-in notification systems with each notification occupying a single "line". I've even seen character based drop-down "notification windows" doing similar functions on dumb terminals in the 80's. I even remember working on an internal office e-mail system and remember having to code the software to "save" the character contents of the terminal display in order to display something on top, and then be able to "restore" the screen by re-displaying the over-written content.
Doesn't matter is it's swipe down, swipe up or swipe left/right, the concept is till the same. A flying window containing notification events. And it's been around for a long time.
As I said -- you didn't seem to get it the first time -- I woud be happy to donate 0.018315% of my Apple holdings. Tell me to whom and where I should send the check.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony
Only post it when its relevant and in many cases it is.
Its not relevant in this case. It is a picture frame and this case is about software patents. (none of which seem to apply to the picture frame.) Just an FYI too, the design patents used in the europe cases were all filed in the early 90s. The picture frame has never actually been relevant to anything. It is just super duper extra not relevant here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
You guys can dance around all you want imagining that Google has been some big litigator. Instead it's more of the "we against the world" attitude carried over from back in the day when Apple really was "we against the world". Google hasn't sued Apple. Google hasn't sued Microsoft.
Simply find a case where Google has initiated an IP lawsuit against a competitor. Any competitor will do. There's gotta be several of those over their 15 years of existence considering the attacks they get from all sides. Surely they've at least turned around and filed their own counter-suit IP claims in defense. Even forget an whether IP is involved. Find any lawsuit they've filed against a competitor, just one, and I'll happily acknowledge that I'm wrong.
Buying a company with active litigation going on is not Google suing a competitor.
Selling patents to HTC that are used for HTC defense is not Google suing a competitor.
Announcing they wish to purchase some company who has on-going issues with a competitor is not Google suing a competitor.
Wait until they actually put their name to a lawsuit against Apple, or Microsoft or Oracle or whoever. Then everyone can have a go on how it's proof of how evil Google is, attacking it's rivals in court rather than the marketplace. It will probably happen eventually. I'm shocked Google hasn't done so already with the Microsoft/Apple gang-bang going on. So far not one forum member can find an actual case where they have. Think there might be a reason for that?
I gave you a very, very clear case. You simply chose to ignore it because it does not fit your world view. So Motorola suing Apple as a Google subsidary really does not count to you? That just makes you delusional. Stop fighting for a cause you already lost.
The litigation was not active when the acquisition started, it did not even start until January 2012. Do you really think that litigation was initiated without Google's knowledge? Show me where someone from Motorola was fired for doing that. Have you ever been involved in an acquisition? Things like that simply do not happen. The January lawsuit was a Google lawsuit.
Agree. Engadget just isn't the same without Topolsky. And Topolsky just isn't the same now that he's a TV personality. Can't say anything too controversial any more.
Anyway, here's to many more Android smackdowns. You know it's going to keep on getting worse and worse for the copycats.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
I headed over to Engadget for a few laughs, a site which I rarely visit anymore, because the comment sections are infested with ignorant trash and human garbage, but it was pretty funny and also pretty predictable to read some of the whiny and hateful comments being made by the butthurt Fandroids there. Hopefully there are more bans and injunctions coming in the future, it makes me feel good to see other ignorant people mad.
And have you read the type of comments on Apple Insider? The levels of fanboy-ism here are beyond belief, no other site comes close.
I used to be fanboy for Commodore products back in the day, WHEN I WAS EIGHT YEARS OLD. Then I grew up, and learnt the enjoy good tech whoever made it. It's absurd and moronic to have slavish devotion to global mega companies, as they exist purely to make a profit and couldn't give a damn what any idiotic fanboy thinks or does.
As for Apple vs Google, it's pathetic, childish, and makes them both look terrible in the eyes of consumers. Android is far from being a clone of iOS anymore, but there are certain problems that have common solutions, such as the ability to search using voice. In this case, to be frank, it just looks like Apple are feeling the heat and resorting to dirty tricks. It stinks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk
not that it would make any difference, but feel free to donate all your shares of Apple to the Apple Legal Defense fund.
No need to. Samsung as the loser will pay patent fee and legal cost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
You guys can dance around all you want imagining that Google has been some big litigator. Instead it's more of the "we against the world" attitude carried over from back in the day when Apple really was "we against the world". Google hasn't sued Apple. Google hasn't sued Microsoft.
Simply find a case where Google has initiated an IP lawsuit against a competitor. Any competitor will do. There's gotta be several of those over their 15 years of existence considering the attacks they get from all sides. Surely they've at least turned around and filed their own counter-suit IP claims in defense. Even forget an whether IP is involved. Find any lawsuit they've filed against a competitor, just one, and I'll happily acknowledge that I'm wrong.
Buying a company with active litigation going on is not Google suing a competitor.
Selling patents to HTC that are used for HTC defense is not Google suing a competitor.
Announcing they wish to purchase some company who has on-going issues with a competitor is not Google suing a competitor.
Wait until they actually put their name to a lawsuit against Apple, or Microsoft or Oracle or whoever. Then everyone can have a go on how it's proof of how evil Google is, attacking it's rivals in court rather than the marketplace. It will probably happen eventually. I'm shocked Google hasn't done so already with the Microsoft/Apple gang-bang going on. So far not one forum member can find an actual case where they have. Think there might be a reason for that?
I think you forgot, if Google didn't buy Motorola, Google will be one of Motorola patents infringer.
No EricTheHalfBee, it is not a resizing issue. Remember the case was a "look and feel" case. Apple presented manipulated image in regard to Samsung Galaxy Tab just to look like IPad, IMO. No one would think they have different ratio. In reality, they are different. iPad is chunky, but Galaxy Tab is much thinner and taller.
If were just a resizing issue as you claim, GT would be much thinner with same height.
That's not unexpected on a site that's Apple-centric although there's plenty of Apple bashing going and legit criticism. On a site like Engadget though, they're suppose to be platform agnostic but they have an overriding bottom-llne to promote tech of any kind. Even if Apple had an air-tight case against Samsung or Google, sites like Engadget aren't going to support Apple's legal strategy because it would ultimately mean less tech to promote if Apple were successful. As such, there's precious little objective reporting with respect to these issues. As for myself, while I'm a fan of Apple products, I'm not a fan of their legal strategy because they will almost certainly lose these patent war even if they manage to eek out a few temporary battle victories such as this preliminary injunction. Instead of burning cash up on their lawyers and the court system, I would much rather see them innovating and making substantial improvement to to iOS and iCloud.
Also, when Tim Cook said he hated litigation, he was being disingenuous at best and in fact he is all in on litigation and has every intention to fulfill the thermonuclear legal directives of Steve Jobs. The question though is whether or not Apple is attempting to stop other companies from making knock-offs or are they attempting to stop competitors from making a better mousetrap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb
hill60,
Trust me my phone does not have any lag (yes my Nexus is rooted, but I have not tweaked any yet because I don't need at the moment)
I found that colourfull widgets may cause some lags. So, I removed not soused colourfull widgets from home screen except the stock gallery widget. I use alots of widgets 4 home screen full, but all of them are transparent (glass or smoked glass) except two, a flash light switch and the gallery widget.
You can customise and optimize your requirement with Galaxy Nexus. You don't really need to root. Some people do not care some lags, so they maximize the potential. If you set it just like iPhone, it would not lag, IMO.
So Google is wasting their time with their Jellybean fixing lag via Butter, which according to you is not needed.
Who is lying, then?
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbyrn
That's not unexpected on a site that's Apple-centric although there's plenty of Apple bashing going and legit criticism. On a site like Engadget though, they're suppose to be platform agnostic but they have an overriding bottom-llne to promote tech of any kind. Even if Apple had an air-tight case against Samsung or Google, sites like Engadget aren't going to support Apple's legal strategy because it would ultimately mean less tech to promote if Apple were successful. As such, there's precious little objective reporting with respect to these issues. As for myself, while I'm a fan of Apple products, I'm not a fan of their legal strategy because they will almost certainly lose these patent war even if they manage to eek out a few temporary battle victories such as this preliminary injunction. Instead of burning cash up on their lawyers and the court system, I would much rather see them innovating and making substantial improvement to to iOS and iCloud.
Also, when Tim Cook said he hated litigation, he was being disingenuous at best and in fact he is all in on litigation and has every intention to fulfill the thermonuclear legal directives of Steve Jobs. The question though is whether or not Apple is attempting to stop other companies from making knock-offs or are they attempting to stop competitors from making a better mousetrap.
Get a clue, the one thing Steve Jobs and now Tim Cook hated more than litigation was PEOPLE STEALING THEIR STUFF.
Apple only litigates against people who deserve it, there are plenty of companies that design around Apple's IP and they are not being sued.
Sony for example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbyrn
Also, when Tim Cook said he hated litigation, he was being disingenuous at best and in fact he is all in on litigation and has every intention to fulfill the thermonuclear legal directives of Steve Jobs. The question though is whether or not Apple is attempting to stop other companies from making knock-offs or are they attempting to stop competitors from making a better mousetrap.
...and there you go. That's the issue with software patents. A company holding the rights may have the honest intent of only protecting their specific innovation in their specific product. Another may have the intent of using vaguely written IP to strongly discourage new entrants and block serious competitors in "their" market, stifling innovation and creative product ideas.
"Wow. those guys really came up with a great idea. Heck of a crew they've got. You have to admire them"
"What they've done has really got me excited about our own product line and has me thinking outside our own box. Take their latest idea"
" While it's a great start, and they should be commended, I don't think they understand where they've limited it. If you begin with what they've done and look at it with (whatever) in mind instead of (whatever) then you could do this. Change the interface to allow (whatever), add the ability to work with the (whatever) as well as tweak the idea that you should be able to (whatever) and you end up with a feature that truly works for a whole range of uses."
Why should thinking about ways to improve another's ideas be stifled by fears that your bigger richer competitor is going to bring every courtroom attack they can. How does it help innovation if your competitor can find one interpretation of some previously unknown software IP claim to see that your "better mousetrap" is banished or at least delayed long enough that your innovative improvements in a device that competitor may not be interested in building anyway don't matter anymore?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
...and there you go. That's the issue with software patents. A company holding the rights may have the honest intent of only protecting their specific innovation in their specific product. Another may have the intent of using vaguely written IP to strongly discourage new entrants and block serious competitors in "their" market.
While, another company may, lie, cheat, steal, defraud standards bodies, and pay people like you to come to web sites like this to defend and cover up their actions.
And, I see above you've been promoting that particular fiction, again, that Google isn't wielding standards essential patents, that were pledged to FRAND licensing, like a baseball bat. But, as pointed out, all these Motorola lawsuits are really Google law suits, and we know that Google specifically approved all of them.
Google is a completely dishonest company whose word means nothing. Remember net neutrality, and how fast they sold that out once it was to their advantage? Now we've seen all this double speak on patents (apparently, the reason they bought Motorola wasn't for Moto's patent, but to use Moto as a patent trolling front), where they, again, say one thing and do another. We have impressive claims about Android activations for which there is no corroborating evidence. Basically, Google's word is completely worthless. Don't bother reading their privacy policy because they aren't going to follow it. Careful buying click through ads from them because if they count those like Android activations, you may pay for a lot more traffic than you ever get.
Lying? I don't know but I am not. Probably you did not read me properly. Yes, if you put resource hungry applications, then Galaxy Nexus might lag some as you know it's specs are not top end, not even matched with Galaxy S2. Again, you can optimize it to you requirement. If you want touch experience with less lag like iPhone, then you could do it by customizing Nexus just like iPhone. I think if iOS allows widgets and live wallpapers, iPhone would lag too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb
Lying? I don't know but I am not. Probably you did not read me properly. Yes, if you put resource hungry applications, then Galaxy Nexus might lag some as you know it's specs are not top end, not even matched with Galaxy S2. Again, you can optimize it to you requirement. If you want touch experience with less lag like iPhone, then you could do it by customizing Nexus just like iPhone. I think if iOS allows widgets and live wallpapers, iPhone would lag too.
So, you're saying that Android lags because Google made bad engineering choices to allow the OS to get bogged down running non-essential processes and that Apple had good technical reasons for not implementing eye-candy resource hogs? That sounds reasonable.
Larger screens? Really? That is innovation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmason1270
Larger screens? Really? That is innovation?
Well, urban anthropologists believe that cell phone display has become, especially for certain subsets of male geeks, a ritualized substitute for penile display, so, bigger is better.
Of course, as usual, screamingfist presents his usual rambling, incoherent arguments that confuse not only facts but time lines and barely maintain any grip on reality.
Wrong.
GOOGLE, you know the ones who bought Android and released it are the ones who claimed butter, a part of Jellybean is specifically being added to address the lag issue inherent to Android due to it being a JVM with no real time access to the custom Linux kernel upon which it runs.
Even the Galaxy S III has this issue, it's only a few tenths of a second but it sure is noticeable.
Hence Google's continuing efforts to address it.
Stop living in denial, it's an inherent flaw no amount of tweaking stuff will get rid of it.