Something is up with Florian -- he had a pretty consistent pro-apple (pro logic, pro competitive market) opinion, but his recent positions have given me a severe case of whiplash.
Then tonight I read he used his $400 screen replacement experience to conclude that a 6" note screen means the software portion of a phone has little value. Wtf? Dude, you got ripped off for a phone repair. A 4" LCD screen isn't much cheaper than a 6" Note screen. Both about $50 in parts.
It says a lot that Florian Mueller is using a Samsung Note 2. Who is this little shit anyway?
You must be new around here. Florian was the poster boy for Apple Insider, and the source used (/copied) by writers here for majority of the articles relating to litigation.. now the writers will have to create their own pro apple stuff!!
He has mentioned that he's developing an Android App. I can only conclude that it's probably an App for a certain demographic where Android is the dominant platform (perhaps something for his home country of Germany).
No App developer wanting to reach the widest possible audience of revenue generating customers would ever choose Android first (or choose to be Android exclusive).
Android first, then Windows with no plans for iOS at this stage.
Too bad if his App gets pirated or if he uses Google's method of piracy protection he gets sued by the patent troll who is currently targeting Android developers who use it.
East Texas might open his eyes a little bit.
Apple's patents are Apple's property, they are not standards essential, Apple can ask whatever they want, it is up to the buyer to accept the price, not use them or blatantly steal them.
He wasn't skewed pro-Apple - he was skewed pro-truth.
Hahaha - quote of the week right there in the comedy category!
Florian is simply stating that $40 per device for 5 patents is too much. Is that unreasonable? What would be too much? $400 per patent? $4000 ? Thousands of patents on a phone, and considering a lot of the patents generally are of dubious value, I doubt $40 for 5 patents is reasonable.
Something is up with Florian -- he had a pretty consistent pro-apple (pro logic, pro competitive market) opinion, but his recent positions have given me a severe case of whiplash.
Then tonight I read he used his $400 screen replacement experience to conclude that a 6" note screen means the software portion of a phone has little value. Wtf? Dude, you got ripped off for a phone repair. A 4" LCD screen isn't much cheaper than a 6" Note screen. Both about $50 in parts.
I really hope we don't find out he was samsunged.
For $A275 Apple replace the whole phone and warranty remains intact.
$A330 for an iPad retina.
It's like my Samsung fridge, it cost less to buy a new fridge than replace cracked shelves, so out the door it went.
The thing with good UI design is that you're trying to make the controls seem obvious. But then if you succeed, people say "That's obvious, you can't patent that." So does that mean no decent UI can ever be patented?
Hahaha - quote of the week right there in the comedy category!
Florian is simply stating that $40 per device for 5 patents is too much. Is that unreasonable? What would be too much? $400 per patent? $4000 ? Thousands of patents on a phone, and considering a lot of the patents generally are of dubious value, I doubt $40 for 5 patents is reasonable.
The patents aren't standards essential, "reasonable" doesn't enter into it.
Pay up, work around or steal, those are the options.
What Apple do have is the deep pockets to sue others and claim they were first..
Apple have good marketing on top of a good product which was made up of a lot of components from other places. Cudo's to them for the product, keep producing more and compete in the market place - try suing less, it hurts your customers by holding back progress of technology by spending $ on lawyers instead.
Maybe neonode should have sued apple for $40/phone for using slide to unlock!
Or LG, another $40/phone, for Look and Feel of a rounded rectangle smartphone with a capacitive screen.. sheesh
Roger that. I suspected you didn't have anything to back up your claims.
So easy getting a rise out of a troll.
You know how to add numbers, right? You understand Grade 3 math? Then you're all set. I suggest going to a tech blog that gets a large number of users/comments (and that isn't heavily moderated). Engadget is a good example (though any blog will do).
Read the following review. When you get to the comments, click on the "Top Comments" to see who got the most votes. You'll see that the majority of them are anti-Apple comments.
You can go to any Apple article/review and find the following points to be true:
1. They have the highest number of views/posts of all articles.
2. The largest number of posts are by the Apple haters.
3. The highest number of "likes" go to the negative Apple comments.
Go to any Android/Samsung article review and the following will be true:
1. They have fewer views/posts than a comparable Apple article.
2. The smallest number of posts are by Apple users/Android haters.
3. The highest number of likes go to the positive Android/Samsung comments.
Now go on and check this for yourself. A few minutes of searching article and scanning comments will verify what I've said to be true. Perhaps if you look long enough you'll find an article that DOESN'T conform to my points. But I highly doubt it.
What Apple do have is the deep pockets to sue others and claim they were first..
Apple have good marketing on top of a good product which was made up of a lot of components from other places. Cudo's to them for the product, keep producing more and compete in the market place - try suing less, it hurts your customers by holding back progress of technology by spending $ on lawyers instead.
Maybe neonode should have sued apple for $40/phone for using slide to unlock!
Or LG, another $40/phone, for Look and Feel of a rounded rectangle smartphone with a capacitive screen.. sheesh
1) I don't recall the Neonode having any slide-to-unlock functionality. The demo below clearly demonstrates a primitive swiping mechanism for proceeding, not for unlocking. This includes three dedicated buttons at the bottom of the screen that would allow you to swipe from bottom-to-top to access those menus, as well as as swiping left-to-right and right-to-left to answer Boolean questions Yes or No, respectively.
[VIDEO]
2) The LG Prada was not a multitouch capacitance device. Apple did not steal from LG and there was no way a single-touch capacitance device was ever going to be a runway hit like the iPhone. The SW was far too limited because like everything pre-iPhone no vendor cared about creating a viable OS that merged with the HW to make a great user experience. Apple and only Apple made this happen.
3) What Apple created was so well thought out and brilliant that everything that came out after it had to follow in its path, and year after year they have continued to set the pass of yet another industry which they dominate. You, of all people, should be happy for Apple decided to jump into this market because without Apple you would be using an inferior product. Your Android or WinPhone-based device is because of what Apple did, not in spite of, so be thankful.
What Apple do have is the deep pockets to sue others and claim they were first..
Apple have good marketing on top of a good product which was made up of a lot of components from other places. Cudo's to them for the product, keep producing more and compete in the market place - try suing less, it hurts your customers by holding back progress of technology by spending $ on lawyers instead.
Maybe neonode should have sued apple for $40/phone for using slide to unlock!
Or LG, another $40/phone, for Look and Feel of a rounded rectangle smartphone with a capacitive screen.. sheesh
What a joke. First off, the link you provided for the Neonode is wrong. They claim "Nionode N1 was the first mobile where performing a gesture on an image unlocked the device". This is an outright lie. The Neonode never had a gesture on an image. You swiped on the lower edge of the screen to select "yes" (you could not do gestures anywhere on the screen - it was permanently fixed to the lower edge).
Secondly, Apple provided the user manual for the Neonode phone to the USPTO as part of their patent application. Apple knew all about the Neonode and included it to show the difference between their version and Neonode's.
Prada? That phone was such an inferior POS compared to the original iPhone I'm surprised people actually bring it up when discussing the iPhone. No, wait, I'm not. Intelligence seems to elude people when the word "Apple" and "patent" come up in the same discussion.
Hahaha - quote of the week right there in the comedy category!
Florian is simply stating that $40 per device for 5 patents is too much. Is that unreasonable? What would be too much? $400 per patent? $4000 ? Thousands of patents on a phone, and considering a lot of the patents generally are of dubious value, I doubt $40 for 5 patents is reasonable.
When your patent is a non-SEP you're allowed to license it to whoever you want (and charge whatever you want). These Apple patents aren't SEP's, so Apple can do as they see fit.
Now Samsung, on the other hand, dropped their SEP's from this case. Good thing too, since they have been under scrutiny by the FTC for their obvious abuse of SEP obligations. Too bad, I hoped Samsung was stupid enough to bring their SEP's up in this case just to see the end result.
You know how to add numbers, right? You understand Grade 3 math? Then you're all set. I suggest going to a tech blog that gets a large number of users/comments (and that isn't heavily moderated). Engadget is a good example (though any blog will do).
Read the following review. When you get to the comments, click on the "Top Comments" to see who got the most votes. You'll see that the majority of them are anti-Apple comments.
You can go to any Apple article/review and find the following points to be true:
1. They have the highest number of views/posts of all articles.
2. The largest number of posts are by the Apple haters.
3. The highest number of "likes" go to the negative Apple comments.
Go to any Android/Samsung article review and the following will be true:
1. They have fewer views/posts than a comparable Apple article.
2. The smallest number of posts are by Apple users/Android haters.
3. The highest number of likes go to the positive Android/Samsung comments.
Now go on and check this for yourself. A few minutes of searching article and scanning comments will verify what I've said to be true. Perhaps if you look long enough you'll find an article that DOESN'T conform to my points. But I highly doubt it.
Ah, so that's what you're using as a source for your claim of what "the numbers" show. I understand now. Thanks.
[Samsung had swiping behaviors too. They didn’t work well, so it copied Apple’s patented implementation. Nearly every patent cites "prior art" that it builds upon. But Samsung didn’t copy the Neonode, it copied Apple over and over, closer and closer until it was infringing Apple's patent the same way HTC admitted. Samsung just doesn’t want to pay.]
[Apple didn’t patent any of those ideas, nor has it claimed to. It patented the complete design of the iPhone, which didn’t resemble the boxy LG Prada. Also, Samsung didn’t copy the Prada, it copied the iPhone.]
What Apple do have is the deep pockets to sue others and claim they were first..
[You think LG and Samsung didn’t have "deep pockets"? They just lacked deep vision, and were left behind. Now they copy.]
Apple have good marketing on top of a good product which was made up of a lot of components from other places. Cudo's to them for the product, keep producing more and compete in the market place - try suing less, it hurts your customers by holding back progress of technology by spending $ on lawyers instead.
Maybe neonode should have sued apple for $40/phone for using slide to unlock!
Or LG, another $40/phone, for Look and Feel of a rounded rectangle smartphone with a capacitive screen.. sheesh
[Does Neonode have a patent on any aspect of its implementation? No. Does LG have any patents on the design of its overpriced 2007 phone that nobody cared about? No.]
He's entitled to his view, whether it's pro-Apple or pro-Samsung, his stance itself shouldn't bother anyone. What strikes me as weird is how he abruptly changed his tune sometime earlier this year.
He mentioned the fact that people were confused by his view change which shows that quite a few people have found the change odd. He did say that people who assumed he was pro-Apple or anti-Android had misunderstood his position but I think there's more to it than that.
The thing with good UI design is that you're trying to make the controls seem obvious. But then if you succeed, people say "That's obvious, you can't patent that." So does that mean no decent UI can ever be patented?
Ah, so that's what you're using as a source for your claim of what "the numbers" show. I understand now. Thanks.
You better believe you understand. All trolls understand what I meant.
Now, shall I bring up the numerous times I asked you to back up claims you've made? Or are you going to continue being a coward and run away when challenged?
In case you forgot, just ask and I'll even do the work of locating the threads and posting links to the topic at hand.
Comments
Which numbers? Care to share your source?
Not for you. Unless you want to go back and answer the numerous questions I've posed to you that you never bothered to back up.
Certain AI members deserve such considerations. You do not.
Not for you. Unless you want to go back and answer the numerous questions I've posed to you that you never bothered to back up.
Certain AI members deserve such considerations. You do not.
Roger that. I suspected you had no evidence to support your claims. Just looking for some confirmation and there it is.
Then tonight I read he used his $400 screen replacement experience to conclude that a 6" note screen means the software portion of a phone has little value. Wtf? Dude, you got ripped off for a phone repair. A 4" LCD screen isn't much cheaper than a 6" Note screen. Both about $50 in parts.
I really hope we don't find out he was samsunged.
It says a lot that Florian Mueller is using a Samsung Note 2. Who is this little shit anyway?
You must be new around here. Florian was the poster boy for Apple Insider, and the source used (/copied) by writers here for majority of the articles relating to litigation.. now the writers will have to create their own pro apple stuff!!
Android first, then Windows with no plans for iOS at this stage.
Too bad if his App gets pirated or if he uses Google's method of piracy protection he gets sued by the patent troll who is currently targeting Android developers who use it.
East Texas might open his eyes a little bit.
Apple's patents are Apple's property, they are not standards essential, Apple can ask whatever they want, it is up to the buyer to accept the price, not use them or blatantly steal them.
He wasn't skewed pro-Apple - he was skewed pro-truth.
Hahaha - quote of the week right there in the comedy category!
Florian is simply stating that $40 per device for 5 patents is too much. Is that unreasonable? What would be too much? $400 per patent? $4000 ? Thousands of patents on a phone, and considering a lot of the patents generally are of dubious value, I doubt $40 for 5 patents is reasonable.
For $A275 Apple replace the whole phone and warranty remains intact.
$A330 for an iPad retina.
It's like my Samsung fridge, it cost less to buy a new fridge than replace cracked shelves, so out the door it went.
The thing with good UI design is that you're trying to make the controls seem obvious. But then if you succeed, people say "That's obvious, you can't patent that." So does that mean no decent UI can ever be patented?
The patents aren't standards essential, "reasonable" doesn't enter into it.
Pay up, work around or steal, those are the options.
How about some facts in this discussion, so we can put some context around 5 patents at $40 per pop.
Firstly, Apple wasn't first to come up with "slide to unlock"... http://www.gsmhistory.com/vintage-mobiles/#neonode_n1_2004
Apple wasn't even the first with a capacitive touch screen, round corners or look and feel of a smart phone: http://www.gsmhistory.com/vintage-mobiles/#prada
What Apple do have is the deep pockets to sue others and claim they were first..
Apple have good marketing on top of a good product which was made up of a lot of components from other places. Cudo's to them for the product, keep producing more and compete in the market place - try suing less, it hurts your customers by holding back progress of technology by spending $ on lawyers instead.
Maybe neonode should have sued apple for $40/phone for using slide to unlock!
Or LG, another $40/phone, for Look and Feel of a rounded rectangle smartphone with a capacitive screen.. sheesh
Roger that. I suspected you didn't have anything to back up your claims.
So easy getting a rise out of a troll.
You know how to add numbers, right? You understand Grade 3 math? Then you're all set. I suggest going to a tech blog that gets a large number of users/comments (and that isn't heavily moderated). Engadget is a good example (though any blog will do).
Read the following review. When you get to the comments, click on the "Top Comments" to see who got the most votes. You'll see that the majority of them are anti-Apple comments.
http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/17/iphone-5s-review/
You can go to any Apple article/review and find the following points to be true:
1. They have the highest number of views/posts of all articles.
2. The largest number of posts are by the Apple haters.
3. The highest number of "likes" go to the negative Apple comments.
Go to any Android/Samsung article review and the following will be true:
1. They have fewer views/posts than a comparable Apple article.
2. The smallest number of posts are by Apple users/Android haters.
3. The highest number of likes go to the positive Android/Samsung comments.
Now go on and check this for yourself. A few minutes of searching article and scanning comments will verify what I've said to be true. Perhaps if you look long enough you'll find an article that DOESN'T conform to my points. But I highly doubt it.
1) I don't recall the Neonode having any slide-to-unlock functionality. The demo below clearly demonstrates a primitive swiping mechanism for proceeding, not for unlocking. This includes three dedicated buttons at the bottom of the screen that would allow you to swipe from bottom-to-top to access those menus, as well as as swiping left-to-right and right-to-left to answer Boolean questions Yes or No, respectively.
2) The LG Prada was not a multitouch capacitance device. Apple did not steal from LG and there was no way a single-touch capacitance device was ever going to be a runway hit like the iPhone. The SW was far too limited because like everything pre-iPhone no vendor cared about creating a viable OS that merged with the HW to make a great user experience. Apple and only Apple made this happen.
3) What Apple created was so well thought out and brilliant that everything that came out after it had to follow in its path, and year after year they have continued to set the pass of yet another industry which they dominate. You, of all people, should be happy for Apple decided to jump into this market because without Apple you would be using an inferior product. Your Android or WinPhone-based device is because of what Apple did, not in spite of, so be thankful.
How about some facts in this discussion, so we can put some context around 5 patents at $40 per pop.
Firstly, Apple wasn't first to come up with "slide to unlock"... http://www.gsmhistory.com/vintage-mobiles/#neonode_n1_2004
Apple wasn't even the first with a capacitive touch screen, round corners or look and feel of a smart phone: http://www.gsmhistory.com/vintage-mobiles/#prada
What Apple do have is the deep pockets to sue others and claim they were first..
Apple have good marketing on top of a good product which was made up of a lot of components from other places. Cudo's to them for the product, keep producing more and compete in the market place - try suing less, it hurts your customers by holding back progress of technology by spending $ on lawyers instead.
Maybe neonode should have sued apple for $40/phone for using slide to unlock!
Or LG, another $40/phone, for Look and Feel of a rounded rectangle smartphone with a capacitive screen.. sheesh
What a joke. First off, the link you provided for the Neonode is wrong. They claim "Nionode N1 was the first mobile where performing a gesture on an image unlocked the device". This is an outright lie. The Neonode never had a gesture on an image. You swiped on the lower edge of the screen to select "yes" (you could not do gestures anywhere on the screen - it was permanently fixed to the lower edge).
Secondly, Apple provided the user manual for the Neonode phone to the USPTO as part of their patent application. Apple knew all about the Neonode and included it to show the difference between their version and Neonode's.
Prada? That phone was such an inferior POS compared to the original iPhone I'm surprised people actually bring it up when discussing the iPhone. No, wait, I'm not. Intelligence seems to elude people when the word "Apple" and "patent" come up in the same discussion.
Hahaha - quote of the week right there in the comedy category!
Florian is simply stating that $40 per device for 5 patents is too much. Is that unreasonable? What would be too much? $400 per patent? $4000 ? Thousands of patents on a phone, and considering a lot of the patents generally are of dubious value, I doubt $40 for 5 patents is reasonable.
When your patent is a non-SEP you're allowed to license it to whoever you want (and charge whatever you want). These Apple patents aren't SEP's, so Apple can do as they see fit.
Now Samsung, on the other hand, dropped their SEP's from this case. Good thing too, since they have been under scrutiny by the FTC for their obvious abuse of SEP obligations. Too bad, I hoped Samsung was stupid enough to bring their SEP's up in this case just to see the end result.
So easy getting a rise out of a troll.
You know how to add numbers, right? You understand Grade 3 math? Then you're all set. I suggest going to a tech blog that gets a large number of users/comments (and that isn't heavily moderated). Engadget is a good example (though any blog will do).
Read the following review. When you get to the comments, click on the "Top Comments" to see who got the most votes. You'll see that the majority of them are anti-Apple comments.
http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/17/iphone-5s-review/
You can go to any Apple article/review and find the following points to be true:
1. They have the highest number of views/posts of all articles.
2. The largest number of posts are by the Apple haters.
3. The highest number of "likes" go to the negative Apple comments.
Go to any Android/Samsung article review and the following will be true:
1. They have fewer views/posts than a comparable Apple article.
2. The smallest number of posts are by Apple users/Android haters.
3. The highest number of likes go to the positive Android/Samsung comments.
Now go on and check this for yourself. A few minutes of searching article and scanning comments will verify what I've said to be true. Perhaps if you look long enough you'll find an article that DOESN'T conform to my points. But I highly doubt it.
Ah, so that's what you're using as a source for your claim of what "the numbers" show. I understand now. Thanks.
How about some facts in this discussion, so we can put some context around 5 patents at $40 per pop.
Firstly, Apple wasn't first to come up with "slide to unlock"... http://www.gsmhistory.com/vintage-mobiles/#neonode_n1_2004
[Samsung had swiping behaviors too. They didn’t work well, so it copied Apple’s patented implementation. Nearly every patent cites "prior art" that it builds upon. But Samsung didn’t copy the Neonode, it copied Apple over and over, closer and closer until it was infringing Apple's patent the same way HTC admitted. Samsung just doesn’t want to pay.]
Apple wasn't even the first with a capacitive touch screen, round corners or look and feel of a smart phone: http://www.gsmhistory.com/vintage-mobiles/#prada
[Apple didn’t patent any of those ideas, nor has it claimed to. It patented the complete design of the iPhone, which didn’t resemble the boxy LG Prada. Also, Samsung didn’t copy the Prada, it copied the iPhone.]
What Apple do have is the deep pockets to sue others and claim they were first..
[You think LG and Samsung didn’t have "deep pockets"? They just lacked deep vision, and were left behind. Now they copy.]
Apple have good marketing on top of a good product which was made up of a lot of components from other places. Cudo's to them for the product, keep producing more and compete in the market place - try suing less, it hurts your customers by holding back progress of technology by spending $ on lawyers instead.
Maybe neonode should have sued apple for $40/phone for using slide to unlock!
Or LG, another $40/phone, for Look and Feel of a rounded rectangle smartphone with a capacitive screen.. sheesh
[Does Neonode have a patent on any aspect of its implementation? No. Does LG have any patents on the design of its overpriced 2007 phone that nobody cared about? No.]
He mentioned the fact that people were confused by his view change which shows that quite a few people have found the change odd. He did say that people who assumed he was pro-Apple or anti-Android had misunderstood his position but I think there's more to it than that.
Of course it can be patented.
Now, shall I bring up the numerous times I asked you to back up claims you've made? Or are you going to continue being a coward and run away when challenged?
In case you forgot, just ask and I'll even do the work of locating the threads and posting links to the topic at hand.