Okay, I thought TechStud knew his stuff but since he seems to have missed this...
A screen with touch sensors is a touch screen, nothing more. One press to one button equivalent.
Apple's multi-touch implementation is a touch screen or laptop trackpad that can register several touches at the same time, as well as "gestures" - where the multiple touches change position on the screen to form the basis of a command. It can tell the difference between a single finger, two fingers, three, or four, and trigger different responses depending on how many fingers are used, or if two fingers "pinch" together or pull apart for zoom, or twist to rotate. I'm certain I've seen several Apple commercials displaying this functionality, and of course I use them often on my phone and MacBook Pro.
A little more responsive than the average CitiBank ATM.
OK- but Apple's tech was built upon the touch tech (which Apple no way invented)- and that there can be no denying.
but what confuses me is that I read somewhere that Nokia and Qualcomm have a sort of 'joint custody' over the collection of GSM patents owed by both (and a few other patents involved in various standards). if this is true, why hasn't Qualcomm tossed in to back up their buddy. wouldn't they benefit as well.
If I recall Nokia got sued by Qualcomm, so no alliance there.
5. Prior to filing this Complaint, Nokia has made various offers to Apple for the F/RAND terms and conditions of a license agreement under which each of the patents-in-suit could be licensed either individually or together with other Nokia essential patents (i.e., a portfolio license). In its offers to Apple, Nokia has specified both a portfolio rate and an average per-patent royalty rate which Apple could have accepted within a reasonable time for each of the patents-in-suit.
Dude, multi -touch has been around since the 90's- have you ever used a Citibank ATM? Apple would like you to think they invent everything. Even the new mouse is nothing revoutionary. It's just the way Apple presents it that's different.
but dude, are you really going to play dumb on this as well....you are in IT and you are trying to tell me you do not know the difference of mutual capacitance touch-screen/self capacitance screen that apple has created and patented vs. a single-input touch screen that has been around since the 90's?
Dude, multi -touch has been around since the 90's- have you ever used a Citibank ATM? Apple would like you to think they invent everything. Even the new mouse is nothing revoutionary. It's just the way Apple presents it that's different.
but dude, are you really going to play dumb on this as well....you are in IT and you are trying to tell me you do not know the difference of mutual capacitance touch-screen/self capacitance screen that apple has created and patented vs. a single-input touch screen that has been around since the 90's?
And just another reason why it's all but impossible for any fledgeling company to enter into todays technology arena and even hope to succeed. Image if Apple were just being started today?
..They would have been sued into oblivion long before they even got to decide on the colors for their corporate logo..
Just another reason why the entire patent system needs to be overhauled, I'm not saying _ALL_ patents are evil but the patent mine field as it exists today make the market all but impossible for a fledgeling company to survive in and the only hope they have to to survive long enough to get noticed and bought up by somebody else.
Somehow when MS and Apple started they didn't hope an prey they simply got taken over by someone else.
Originally Posted by teckstud OK- but Apple's tech was built upon the touch tech (which Apple no way invented)- and that there can be no denying.
What, are you going to backtrack on your statements until there's some small fragment left that you can claim was true? You did the same thing when claiming that Apple never gives anything away for free, only to be corrected numerous times.
This will end in a stalemate, or at best, Apple getting spanked with a huge fine.
Nokia has nothing to worry about.
In 1997, five years after the lawsuit was decided, all lingering infringement questions against Microsoft regarding the Lisa and Macintosh GUI as well as Apple's "QuickTime piracy" lawsuit against Microsoft were settled in direct negotiations. Apple agreed to make Internet Explorer their default browser, to the detriment of Netscape. Microsoft agreed to continue developing Microsoft Office and other software for the Mac over the next five years. Microsoft also purchased $150 million of non-voting Apple stock, helping Apple in its financial struggles at the time. Both parties entered into a patent cross-licensing agreement.[5][6]
In recent years, Apple has resumed threats of litigation in this area. Before the release of the Aqua GUI for Mac OS X, Apple threatened litigation against a Windows skin named WinAqua which was meant to emulate Apple's GUI based on a Mac OS X beta release.[7] Similarly, Stardock released a desktop enhancement program for Windows, named DesktopX, which was similar to Aqua. Apple, however, demanded the company remove, "anything that even remotely looks like Aqua.
Seems MicroSux can not even come up with an original name for their products...LOL...
kinda of like the Zune, MicroSux Store with complete Guru and layout with the help of Apple....Nokia new 3D multi-touch will probably suck as much as all their other phones...which is why they are suing Apple for its multi-touch implementation...but guess what, you need something better than the crappy Symbian to run it, which is why they are turning to Linux...but with all Nokia endeavors... they look/feel/responsively cheap knockoffs...
OK- but Apple's tech was built upon the touch tech (which Apple no way invented)- and that there can be no denying.
Actually, that's not correct. The touch technology used in a common ATM uses a different sensing mechanism than that used in the iPhone. I recall one of the numerous iPhone clones used the same ATM technology, and was hated for it, as it required you to linger on each press to ensure the OS recognized that you had hit a button.
ATM's typically use surface capacitance or resistive touch technology. iPhone uses Projected capacitance.
What, are you going to backtrack on your statements until there's some small fragment left that you can claim was true? You did the same thing when claiming that Apple never gives anything away for free, only to be corrected numerous times.
Yes I can.
And I haven't been corrected as you can't prove Apple gave me anything for free and that it wasn't the sudio or label. You have now been corrected.
Apple acquired a small company named FingerWorks which did invent it.
Well they should actually consider themselves lucky.... If Apple didn't buy them up that little startup would have been crushed by the lawyers of any number of technology companies.
Does anyone really think 'FingerWorks' could have ever made it on their own?
Actually, that's not correct. The touch technology used in a common ATM uses a different sensing mechanism than that used in the iPhone. I recall one of the numerous iPhone clones used the same ATM technology, and was hated for it, as it required you to linger on each press to ensure the OS recognized that you had hit a button.
ATM's typically use surface capacitance or resistive touch technology. iPhone uses Projected capacitance.
Cool- now that's somebody who knows their stuff- unlike many others on here. Thank you for that info, DJRumpy. So Apple is now liscensing that tech out to everyone now? Doesn't that seem a bit counter-productive?
Before this thread goes through 5 pages on multitouch and who invented, can I point out that Nokia's handsets don't use multitouch at the moment.
I'm not entirely convinced by Apple's argument here. Whilst I'm sure Nokia has copied the basic premise of Apple's interface (finger-driven touchscreen), they differ wildly in their current execution. Nokia's touch-based interface is very clearly designed around the concepts of its existing S60 smartphone interface (much to its hindrance). The icons and layouts were around long before the iPhone.
I'm not saying that Apple's patents are without merit. I'm sure there's at least 13 areas where Nokia infringes but I don't believe that the patents cover fundamental aspects of the phone's operation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robodude
How likely is some sort of cross patent deal between the two?
Very likely, I'd say. And I wouldn't be surprised if it was Nokia's aim all along.
How likely is some sort of cross patent deal between the two?
Very. Now that a bunch of patents are all are down on the table Nokia can see Apple may be able to make it very difficult to do a smartphone, something I believe they thought was unlikely originally. Apple has already seen Nokia can try to make it very difficult to make a phone at all. For either company to be successful it will cost A LOT, probably more than licensing given the suit-countersuit.
It's all a dance done with lawyers as the instruments and if both sides can play a meaningful tune to the others ears, cross-licensing is the settlement of least risk.
Comments
Okay, I thought TechStud knew his stuff but since he seems to have missed this...
A screen with touch sensors is a touch screen, nothing more. One press to one button equivalent.
Apple's multi-touch implementation is a touch screen or laptop trackpad that can register several touches at the same time, as well as "gestures" - where the multiple touches change position on the screen to form the basis of a command. It can tell the difference between a single finger, two fingers, three, or four, and trigger different responses depending on how many fingers are used, or if two fingers "pinch" together or pull apart for zoom, or twist to rotate. I'm certain I've seen several Apple commercials displaying this functionality, and of course I use them often on my phone and MacBook Pro.
A little more responsive than the average CitiBank ATM.
OK- but Apple's tech was built upon the touch tech (which Apple no way invented)- and that there can be no denying.
but what confuses me is that I read somewhere that Nokia and Qualcomm have a sort of 'joint custody' over the collection of GSM patents owed by both (and a few other patents involved in various standards). if this is true, why hasn't Qualcomm tossed in to back up their buddy. wouldn't they benefit as well.
If I recall Nokia got sued by Qualcomm, so no alliance there.
5. Prior to filing this Complaint, Nokia has made various offers to Apple for the F/RAND terms and conditions of a license agreement under which each of the patents-in-suit could be licensed either individually or together with other Nokia essential patents (i.e., a portfolio license). In its offers to Apple, Nokia has specified both a portfolio rate and an average per-patent royalty rate which Apple could have accepted within a reasonable time for each of the patents-in-suit.
Dude, multi -touch has been around since the 90's- have you ever used a Citibank ATM? Apple would like you to think they invent everything. Even the new mouse is nothing revoutionary. It's just the way Apple presents it that's different.
but dude, are you really going to play dumb on this as well....you are in IT and you are trying to tell me you do not know the difference of mutual capacitance touch-screen/self capacitance screen that apple has created and patented vs. a single-input touch screen that has been around since the 90's?
Game on. This should be interesting.
More like CHECKMATE or STALEMATE?
Dude, multi -touch has been around since the 90's- have you ever used a Citibank ATM? Apple would like you to think they invent everything. Even the new mouse is nothing revoutionary. It's just the way Apple presents it that's different.
but dude, are you really going to play dumb on this as well....you are in IT and you are trying to tell me you do not know the difference of mutual capacitance touch-screen/self capacitance screen that apple has created and patented vs. a single-input touch screen that has been around since the 90's?
Okay, I thought TechStud knew his stuff but since he seems to have missed this...
what in on earth gave you that impression! 6000+ posts of fiction.
OK- but Apple's tech was built upon the touch tech (which Apple no way invented)- and that there can be no denying.
Apple DID NOT invent Multitouch.
Apple acquired a small company named FingerWorks which did invent it.
That's more like it. Battle of the titans!
And just another reason why it's all but impossible for any fledgeling company to enter into todays technology arena and even hope to succeed. Image if Apple were just being started today?
..They would have been sued into oblivion long before they even got to decide on the colors for their corporate logo..
Just another reason why the entire patent system needs to be overhauled, I'm not saying _ALL_ patents are evil but the patent mine field as it exists today make the market all but impossible for a fledgeling company to survive in and the only hope they have to to survive long enough to get noticed and bought up by somebody else.
Somehow when MS and Apple started they didn't hope an prey they simply got taken over by someone else.
Originally Posted by teckstud OK- but Apple's tech was built upon the touch tech (which Apple no way invented)- and that there can be no denying.
What, are you going to backtrack on your statements until there's some small fragment left that you can claim was true? You did the same thing when claiming that Apple never gives anything away for free, only to be corrected numerous times.
Or is this just a merit-less counter lawsuit?
Is the new Apple building going up in North Carolina actually to house Apple's legal team?
Why are there spy cameras in all Apple Stores recording people's buying behavior patterns?
Hell, lets just let all the dirt out...
So true.. So true..
This will end in a stalemate, or at best, Apple getting spanked with a huge fine.
Nokia has nothing to worry about.
In 1997, five years after the lawsuit was decided, all lingering infringement questions against Microsoft regarding the Lisa and Macintosh GUI as well as Apple's "QuickTime piracy" lawsuit against Microsoft were settled in direct negotiations. Apple agreed to make Internet Explorer their default browser, to the detriment of Netscape. Microsoft agreed to continue developing Microsoft Office and other software for the Mac over the next five years. Microsoft also purchased $150 million of non-voting Apple stock, helping Apple in its financial struggles at the time. Both parties entered into a patent cross-licensing agreement.[5][6]
In recent years, Apple has resumed threats of litigation in this area. Before the release of the Aqua GUI for Mac OS X, Apple threatened litigation against a Windows skin named WinAqua which was meant to emulate Apple's GUI based on a Mac OS X beta release.[7] Similarly, Stardock released a desktop enhancement program for Windows, named DesktopX, which was similar to Aqua. Apple, however, demanded the company remove, "anything that even remotely looks like Aqua.
Seems MicroSux can not even come up with an original name for their products...LOL...
kinda of like the Zune, MicroSux Store with complete Guru and layout with the help of Apple....Nokia new 3D multi-touch will probably suck as much as all their other phones...which is why they are suing Apple for its multi-touch implementation...but guess what, you need something better than the crappy Symbian to run it, which is why they are turning to Linux...but with all Nokia endeavors... they look/feel/responsively cheap knockoffs...
OK- but Apple's tech was built upon the touch tech (which Apple no way invented)- and that there can be no denying.
Actually, that's not correct. The touch technology used in a common ATM uses a different sensing mechanism than that used in the iPhone. I recall one of the numerous iPhone clones used the same ATM technology, and was hated for it, as it required you to linger on each press to ensure the OS recognized that you had hit a button.
ATM's typically use surface capacitance or resistive touch technology. iPhone uses Projected capacitance.
What, are you going to backtrack on your statements until there's some small fragment left that you can claim was true? You did the same thing when claiming that Apple never gives anything away for free, only to be corrected numerous times.
Yes I can.
And I haven't been corrected as you can't prove Apple gave me anything for free and that it wasn't the sudio or label. You have now been corrected.
Apple DID NOT invent Multitouch.
Apple acquired a small company named FingerWorks which did invent it.
Well they should actually consider themselves lucky.... If Apple didn't buy them up that little startup would have been crushed by the lawyers of any number of technology companies.
Does anyone really think 'FingerWorks' could have ever made it on their own?
What are the patents that Nokia has infringed upon?
Or is this just a merit-less counter lawsuit?
Is the new Apple building going up in North Carolina actually to house Apple's legal team?
Why are there spy cameras in all Apple Stores recording people's buying behavior patterns?
Hell, lets just let all the dirt out...
MY GOD THERE ARE CAMERAS IN BANKS and ATMS watching everyone's deposits and withdrawals, it has nothing to do with SECURITY!
Actually, that's not correct. The touch technology used in a common ATM uses a different sensing mechanism than that used in the iPhone. I recall one of the numerous iPhone clones used the same ATM technology, and was hated for it, as it required you to linger on each press to ensure the OS recognized that you had hit a button.
ATM's typically use surface capacitance or resistive touch technology. iPhone uses Projected capacitance.
Cool- now that's somebody who knows their stuff- unlike many others on here. Thank you for that info, DJRumpy. So Apple is now liscensing that tech out to everyone now? Doesn't that seem a bit counter-productive?
I'm not entirely convinced by Apple's argument here. Whilst I'm sure Nokia has copied the basic premise of Apple's interface (finger-driven touchscreen), they differ wildly in their current execution. Nokia's touch-based interface is very clearly designed around the concepts of its existing S60 smartphone interface (much to its hindrance). The icons and layouts were around long before the iPhone.
I'm not saying that Apple's patents are without merit. I'm sure there's at least 13 areas where Nokia infringes but I don't believe that the patents cover fundamental aspects of the phone's operation.
How likely is some sort of cross patent deal between the two?
Very likely, I'd say. And I wouldn't be surprised if it was Nokia's aim all along.
How likely is some sort of cross patent deal between the two?
Very. Now that a bunch of patents are all are down on the table Nokia can see Apple may be able to make it very difficult to do a smartphone, something I believe they thought was unlikely originally. Apple has already seen Nokia can try to make it very difficult to make a phone at all. For either company to be successful it will cost A LOT, probably more than licensing given the suit-countersuit.
It's all a dance done with lawyers as the instruments and if both sides can play a meaningful tune to the others ears, cross-licensing is the settlement of least risk.