These are pretty arrogant views, is all I can say.
Arrogant or not, I agree with their sentiments.
There are too many lawsuits over software patents. Heck, there are too many lawsuits in general. For that reason, it doesn't matter if the case is good or bad, frivolous or not, promoting "freedom and liberty to sue" or not. I just want to see less suing and less media coverage of that suing as a result.
The sad fact of the matter is, anyone can sue over a nutty software patent and win, just by bring the case to Texas state. It's ridiculous.
These are pretty arrogant views, is all I can say.
They say if you can't "do"... teach.
Being a professor in no way implies any special abilities or merit. In fact it's a deliberate career path to take yourself out of the world of competition for business and ideas. Those ivory towers are designed with excessive insulation.
So his idea of a 'lifestream' somehow covers an album cover flipbook? I think that's a bit of a stretch.
Being a professor in no way implies any special abilities or merit.
Yeah, like that Professor Einstein fellow, he was a total retard. How about that imbecile Professor Hawking, eh?
If a guy is a professor in a place like Princeton, or Cambridge, or Yale --that guy is plenty smart no matter how many snide remarks you can come up with.
Yeah, like that Professor Einstein fellow, he was a total retard. How about that imbecile Professor Hawking, eh?
If a guy is a professor in a place like Princeton, or Cambridge, or Yale --that guy is plenty smart no matter how many snide remarks you can come up with.
oh dear, I think that you will find that Academics can be the worst infringers of intellectual property. They often 'borrow' the ideas of others to advance themselves. Its a serious cutthroat business. Morals have no place in academia. Glad you picked Albert Einstein as an example as he was also a thief/plagiarist.
So why does he submitted the claim in a place where the outcome is favourable to him if he is confident he is still entitled to it then? Not so 'honest' himself does he?
So why does he submitted the claim in a place where the outcome is favourable to him if he is confident he is still entitled to it then? Not so 'honest' himself does he?
According to the article, the suit was filed by the owners of the patent, Mirror Worlds. It says the professor is no longer the owner of the patent. Why are you and others going off on the professor? Maybe the story could have been written more clearly.
The question is: What intent did this professor have to actually implement this feature? If he had none, then he shouldn't have a patent, and he would be a "patent troll" - Whether or not it is a ligitimate person who's actually done research or not. If he had no plans to use it, he was sitting on the patent.
Its not fair to say "I claimed the idea first so you have to pay me if you have the same idea." Its only fair to say "I came up with this idea, and I have a right to bring it to market and monetise it.
It seems likely that Apple (and Mr. Coverflow) came up with these ideas independently. They?re really not the same thing, merely similar in some ways.
I can imagine the frustration that could be felt by someone who came up with something similar?I?d feel the same way! But these things happen?it doesn?t mean an intentional theft and cover-up! (Still, if he has legal rights because of his ideas, then I hope Apple will comply with the law.)
Apple acquired the coverflow tech from a guy who posts over at Ars-- can't remember his screen name off hand. The Ars guy had been selling (or maybe it was freeware?) a very popular coverflow-esque piece of software and when Apple released their implementation everyone at Ars was like "Wow, dude, did Apple just steal that from you or what?"
That would be Catfish. It was written in Cocoa and based on an idea someone had about flipping of physical albums to find one you want. Apple acquired the intellectual property and code.
To be honest I'm shocked there is a patent from '99. This was a well researched topic during the 80s and early 90s in the Human Computer Interaction field, including at Apple.
Apple is famous for patenting the most trivial details so it serves them right to lose a patent suit against someone who invented technologies that Apple sells.
Have you looked at Apple's patent portfolio? Ever?
Coverflow, the first time I saw it, reminded me of this device they used to advertise in the 70's where you'd load it up with LP's and you could flip through them, I can't remember what it was called, it was a long time ago.
As far as timescape goes a text based list will serve the same purpose as a series of screenshots.
Yeah, like that Professor Einstein fellow, he was a total retard. How about that imbecile Professor Hawking, eh?
If a guy is a professor in a place like Princeton, or Cambridge, or Yale --that guy is plenty smart no matter how many snide remarks you can come up with.
My father was a very respected professor. Many of his colleagues are people I have immense respect for. Many of them are complete assholes. Some of them are idiots.
Frankly, I think apple could drop CoverFlow completely and no one would notice.
I thought I was the only one who could see little value in Coverflow - I never use Coverflow preferring instead the list views as I find them faster and more efficient.
I thought I was the only one who could see little value in Coverflow - I never use Coverflow preferring instead the list views as I find them faster and more efficient.
Each to their own I guess.
CoverFlow is the least important of the items listed though. TimeMachine would be the top of the importance list IMHO. As others have said, the concept of time in filing seems to go far further than any examples cited, every OS out there is underpinned by this I would have thought.
On the specific claims in this trial I see an appeal coming unless Apple simply buy the rights.
Comments
These are pretty arrogant views, is all I can say.
Arrogant or not, I agree with their sentiments.
There are too many lawsuits over software patents. Heck, there are too many lawsuits in general. For that reason, it doesn't matter if the case is good or bad, frivolous or not, promoting "freedom and liberty to sue" or not. I just want to see less suing and less media coverage of that suing as a result.
The sad fact of the matter is, anyone can sue over a nutty software patent and win, just by bring the case to Texas state. It's ridiculous.
Frankly, I think apple could drop CoverFlow completely and no one would notice.
I would!...
And besides, doesn't that diagram look like a feature of Windows 7?
Why weren't they sued?!
I would!...
And besides, doesn't that diagram look like a feature of Windows 7?
Why weren't they sued?!
i have win7 on my lenovo, i have not found any feature that does that, at least not on the ultimate edition.
I think that this is really pointless, Apple should really just try to buy it instead of appealing etc.
Man kiss my a**!!
it's always about the money! you ain't heard?
OMFG!!!!!!
Patent troll like all the rest of them.
These are pretty arrogant views, is all I can say.
They say if you can't "do"... teach.
Being a professor in no way implies any special abilities or merit. In fact it's a deliberate career path to take yourself out of the world of competition for business and ideas. Those ivory towers are designed with excessive insulation.
So his idea of a 'lifestream' somehow covers an album cover flipbook? I think that's a bit of a stretch.
Being a professor in no way implies any special abilities or merit.
Yeah, like that Professor Einstein fellow, he was a total retard. How about that imbecile Professor Hawking, eh?
If a guy is a professor in a place like Princeton, or Cambridge, or Yale --that guy is plenty smart no matter how many snide remarks you can come up with.
Yeah, like that Professor Einstein fellow, he was a total retard. How about that imbecile Professor Hawking, eh?
If a guy is a professor in a place like Princeton, or Cambridge, or Yale --that guy is plenty smart no matter how many snide remarks you can come up with.
oh dear, I think that you will find that Academics can be the worst infringers of intellectual property. They often 'borrow' the ideas of others to advance themselves. Its a serious cutthroat business. Morals have no place in academia. Glad you picked Albert Einstein as an example as he was also a thief/plagiarist.
So why does he submitted the claim in a place where the outcome is favourable to him if he is confident he is still entitled to it then? Not so 'honest' himself does he?
According to the article, the suit was filed by the owners of the patent, Mirror Worlds. It says the professor is no longer the owner of the patent. Why are you and others going off on the professor? Maybe the story could have been written more clearly.
Its not fair to say "I claimed the idea first so you have to pay me if you have the same idea." Its only fair to say "I came up with this idea, and I have a right to bring it to market and monetise it.
I can imagine the frustration that could be felt by someone who came up with something similar?I?d feel the same way! But these things happen?it doesn?t mean an intentional theft and cover-up! (Still, if he has legal rights because of his ideas, then I hope Apple will comply with the law.)
Apple acquired the coverflow tech from a guy who posts over at Ars-- can't remember his screen name off hand. The Ars guy had been selling (or maybe it was freeware?) a very popular coverflow-esque piece of software and when Apple released their implementation everyone at Ars was like "Wow, dude, did Apple just steal that from you or what?"
That would be Catfish. It was written in Cocoa and based on an idea someone had about flipping of physical albums to find one you want. Apple acquired the intellectual property and code.
Here's the Ars thread: http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtop...?f=19&t=313706
To be honest I'm shocked there is a patent from '99. This was a well researched topic during the 80s and early 90s in the Human Computer Interaction field, including at Apple.
Best to Apple in its appeal.
Apple is famous for patenting the most trivial details so it serves them right to lose a patent suit against someone who invented technologies that Apple sells.
As far as timescape goes a text based list will serve the same purpose as a series of screenshots.
These are pretty arrogant views, is all I can say.
Don't be surprised, they all come from users who think Apple invented GSM.
Yeah, like that Professor Einstein fellow, he was a total retard. How about that imbecile Professor Hawking, eh?
If a guy is a professor in a place like Princeton, or Cambridge, or Yale --that guy is plenty smart no matter how many snide remarks you can come up with.
My father was a very respected professor. Many of his colleagues are people I have immense respect for. Many of them are complete assholes. Some of them are idiots.
Frankly, I think apple could drop CoverFlow completely and no one would notice.
I thought I was the only one who could see little value in Coverflow - I never use Coverflow preferring instead the list views as I find them faster and more efficient.
Each to their own I guess.
I thought I was the only one who could see little value in Coverflow - I never use Coverflow preferring instead the list views as I find them faster and more efficient.
Each to their own I guess.
CoverFlow is the least important of the items listed though. TimeMachine would be the top of the importance list IMHO. As others have said, the concept of time in filing seems to go far further than any examples cited, every OS out there is underpinned by this I would have thought.
On the specific claims in this trial I see an appeal coming unless Apple simply buy the rights.
Patents are an odd beast, at best.