They're waiting for Apple to [improve something in their industry, workflow, or environment] so they can push out their already written story about how Apple is [doing the exact opposite].
The NY Times is just another news outlet. They are grubbing for page views. If there's a news item that won't generate a large number of page views, they really aren't compelled to publish it.
I point this out since you repeatedly asked the same question "why am I not seeing this at NYTimes?"
Publication by the NY Times does not reflect a particular news item's validity, nor does NY Times publication give validity to any given news item.
I'd never paid much mind to MacRumors, but since you mentioned it I paid a quick visit. They have a comment thread on the exact same article as posted here. Almost 1000 comments, both sides of the aisle, and largely free of ad-homs from a quick peruse. Interesting. http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1396398
That forum is the worse. It's equivalent to Digg or Gizmodo forums.
SolipsismX is correct if you are looking at reader involvement.
Comment quantity is not proportionally correlated with comment quality, especially at a Q&A forum like MacRumors which does not employ a community-based comment ranking system. It uses human forum moderation which scales poorly. (Yes, I know that many of the MR forum moderators participate here).
This is related to iSheldon's comment about the lack of commentary by the NY Times about a special news item. Coverage does not necessarily equate to quality, especially in 2012 when page views are king.
especially at a Q&A forum like MacRumors which does not employ a community-based comment ranking system.
They do, and have for a year or so, I think. Every post has an up/down feedback thing. We actually don't here. We have the stupid little thumb, but I'd personally like that gone entirely instead of a "down" option added.
Why do people equate writing checks as innovation? Apple didn't invent Siri, develop or have anything to do with it. They wrote a check for it. Smart, very, innovative, not very.
So your ignorance about product development is somehow a detriment to Apple. Cool.
Thanks for the link. Nice to see a plain-English explanation of the claims from those patents, especially from someone at least minimally qualified to understand them. If you assume the explanations are accurate there's a high-likelihood of these being stricken on re-exam. Heck, a huge percentage of patents used in litigation are invalidated in part or whole anyway. Doesn't really help the current situation of course if the patents are later found invalid in some way. The damage will be done long before that.
Yep. That's just the kind of site you would like.
Sorry, but when someone starts out by saying the following, their 'expert' opinion on patents isn't worth much:
However, if you go and read the full patents you will find that the ideas are wrapped up in a legal and technical language that makes each one sound like rocket science.
I dont think his trying to say that Apple stole the design from Samsung. Merely that Samsung did have devices with that form factor before the iPad came out.
Form factor, as in size and aspect ratio? I don't think any design patent covers that.
The one I'm aware of, a Samsung picture frame, the illusion of a similar form factor falls apart when you see it from behind or from the edge.
I understand why Apple is suing... Apple products no longer seem as ground breaking as they used to be. The Android devices on the top end seem to be getting exponentially better with each release where as Apple now seem only to be evolving incrementally.
I am well aware how annoying it is when Android users make a laughing stock of a product that we take for revolutionary and they make look dated. I hope the iPhone5 will be awesome and sets the new standard instead of playing catch up!
Form factor, as in size and aspect ratio? I don't think any design patent covers that.
The one I'm aware of, a Samsung picture frame, the illusion of a similar form factor falls apart when you see it from behind or from the edge.
Apple was not arguing about the back of Galaxy Tab. If you care to see, their back is made of cheap plastic with their big SAMSUNG logo in the middle whereas IPad is made of beautiful aluminum with Apple log in the middle and iPad logo at the bottom. So, the Samsung Digital Photo Frame claim stands imo.
They do, and have for a year or so, I think. Every post has an up/down feedback thing. We actually don't here. We have the stupid little thumb, but I'd personally like that gone entirely instead of a "down" option added.
Downvotes! Yay! I like the stupid little thumb, except that it is pointing the wrong way.
It's not because they use a different device, it's because of their ignorance, their hatred, their stupidity, their lies and their constant bogus attacks on Apple and Apple users.
I would like to see Android completely destroyed. Windows 8 and other systems can be allowed to survive, because I don't really care about them. Android should die though, because I don't like their users.
You are a tosser.
Apple with no competition would mean apple with less innovation. You certainly wouldn't have notification centre on your phone, which was copied from Android.
I think competition does breed innovation because it's only through innovation that you stay ahead of your competition.
You can beat the competition by either having lower prices or better products.
Monopolies breed stagnation and complacency without any incentive to innovate.
You've yet to explain how Apple managed to completely revolutionize industries like the iPad and iPhone when they weren't being pressured by their competitors.
As I said earlier, Apple wants to sell new units to its customers and has an extremely high customer retention rate. So they have their own incentive to constantly improve the product so that their customers buy newer units. In fact, competition can, in some cases, actually detract from that since Apple may feel forced to implement ridiculous features that the market is demanding which actually contribute little to the value of the product. Even without competition, Apple would be improving its products.
Now, in general, real competition does drive the market forward. But elevating it to holy write like you want to do isn't justified. More importantly, you never seemed to grasp that the type of competition that you are advocating (wholesale copying) doesn't have any real benefit other than driving the price down (which can actually reduce innovation by reducing the money available for R&D).
Comments
Still no NYTimes reporting on this whole affair.
They're waiting for Apple to [improve something in their industry, workflow, or environment] so they can push out their already written story about how Apple is [doing the exact opposite].
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon
Still no NYTimes reporting on this whole affair.
The NY Times is just another news outlet. They are grubbing for page views. If there's a news item that won't generate a large number of page views, they really aren't compelled to publish it.
I point this out since you repeatedly asked the same question "why am I not seeing this at NYTimes?"
Publication by the NY Times does not reflect a particular news item's validity, nor does NY Times publication give validity to any given news item.
Journalism died in the Nineties.
That forum is the worse. It's equivalent to Digg or Gizmodo forums.
SolipsismX is correct if you are looking at reader involvement.
Comment quantity is not proportionally correlated with comment quality, especially at a Q&A forum like MacRumors which does not employ a community-based comment ranking system. It uses human forum moderation which scales poorly. (Yes, I know that many of the MR forum moderators participate here).
This is related to iSheldon's comment about the lack of commentary by the NY Times about a special news item. Coverage does not necessarily equate to quality, especially in 2012 when page views are king.
They do, and have for a year or so, I think. Every post has an up/down feedback thing. We actually don't here. We have the stupid little thumb, but I'd personally like that gone entirely instead of a "down" option added.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellacool
Why do people equate writing checks as innovation? Apple didn't invent Siri, develop or have anything to do with it. They wrote a check for it. Smart, very, innovative, not very.
So your ignorance about product development is somehow a detriment to Apple. Cool.
Yep. That's just the kind of site you would like.
Sorry, but when someone starts out by saying the following, their 'expert' opinion on patents isn't worth much:
Form factor, as in size and aspect ratio? I don't think any design patent covers that.
The one I'm aware of, a Samsung picture frame, the illusion of a similar form factor falls apart when you see it from behind or from the edge.
I understand why Apple is suing... Apple products no longer seem as ground breaking as they used to be. The Android devices on the top end seem to be getting exponentially better with each release where as Apple now seem only to be evolving incrementally.
I am well aware how annoying it is when Android users make a laughing stock of a product that we take for revolutionary and they make look dated. I hope the iPhone5 will be awesome and sets the new standard instead of playing catch up!
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Form factor, as in size and aspect ratio? I don't think any design patent covers that.
The one I'm aware of, a Samsung picture frame, the illusion of a similar form factor falls apart when you see it from behind or from the edge.
Apple was not arguing about the back of Galaxy Tab. If you care to see, their back is made of cheap plastic with their big SAMSUNG logo in the middle whereas IPad is made of beautiful aluminum with Apple log in the middle and iPad logo at the bottom. So, the Samsung Digital Photo Frame claim stands imo.
Opinions can be wrong.
Downvotes! Yay! I like the stupid little thumb, except that it is pointing the wrong way.
He said 'other ignorant people'. He was saying he was ignorant also.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
It's not because they use a different device, it's because of their ignorance, their hatred, their stupidity, their lies and their constant bogus attacks on Apple and Apple users.
I would like to see Android completely destroyed. Windows 8 and other systems can be allowed to survive, because I don't really care about them. Android should die though, because I don't like their users.
You are a tosser.
Apple with no competition would mean apple with less innovation. You certainly wouldn't have notification centre on your phone, which was copied from Android.
I can't be bothered to reply to the comments above as you wouldn't listen anyway, so I look forward to see what happens in the court case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw
You are a tosser.
Apple with no competition would mean apple with less innovation.
Since it's already been established that innovation doesn't spring from competition, your conclusion isn't valid
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Since it's already been established that innovation doesn't spring from competition, your conclusion isn't valid
Established by whom?
I think competition does breed innovation because it's only through innovation that you stay ahead of your competition.
You can beat the competition by either having lower prices or better products.
Monopolies breed stagnation and complacency without any incentive to innovate.
You've yet to explain how Apple managed to completely revolutionize industries like the iPad and iPhone when they weren't being pressured by their competitors.
As I said earlier, Apple wants to sell new units to its customers and has an extremely high customer retention rate. So they have their own incentive to constantly improve the product so that their customers buy newer units. In fact, competition can, in some cases, actually detract from that since Apple may feel forced to implement ridiculous features that the market is demanding which actually contribute little to the value of the product. Even without competition, Apple would be improving its products.
Now, in general, real competition does drive the market forward. But elevating it to holy write like you want to do isn't justified. More importantly, you never seemed to grasp that the type of competition that you are advocating (wholesale copying) doesn't have any real benefit other than driving the price down (which can actually reduce innovation by reducing the money available for R&D).