Apple loses patent-infringement trial over Cover Flow, Time Machine

12467

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 130
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 2,572member
    Chronological order is now patented?



    This guy is a tool if he was hurt by not being acknowledged. Really, ordering things by time has been done forever. It's a natural way to organize.
  • Reply 62 of 130
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    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.



    It was called a JUKE BOX.



    Perhaps they should sue Wurlitzer too...
  • Reply 63 of 130
    Is it me, or could his drawing pass as the desktop from Mac OS 6?
  • Reply 64 of 130
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    I agree. Apple will probably have to pony up on this one. A Yale computer prof is unlikely to be some patent-trolling slouch.



    Also, this seems like a half-reported story. It'll be useful to get all the details.



    The Professor did not bring the suit. He sold the rights to the patent to a patent trolling company that does nothing except try and find companies that it can sue which might yield a win.



    trolling for patents. Its a country wide shame.



    Just a thought.

    en
  • Reply 65 of 130
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vaughnsc View Post


    LOL. I would never have guessed this is only my second post (here); I'm opinionated, and read here often enough, but usually GMTA: some other poster has already eloquently expressed a comparable viewpoint.



    Me, I read the Bloomberg article first and my immediate reaction was "Wait- he/they got a patent for WHAT!? Seriously?". I then ran across this article and thought the specifics of the other article might be helpful.....le.



    The Key to a patent being valid is that it expresses a unique approach to something. And here we do have a pictoral layout showing the time machine style presentation for items. FINE



    If the Professor went to Apple and they kicked him to the curb rather than paying him some money and recognising him, FINE they should pay.



    But its about companies that pay a small amount for many patents, then sit and wait for someone to have a functional product and try and sue them for millions and millions.



    Patent trolls, bad..... People coming up with ideas and patenting them, good.



    Just a thought,

    en
  • Reply 66 of 130
    dh87dh87 Posts: 73member
    David Gelernter wrote a paean to Apple for the NY Times Op-ed page, when Apple was a doomed company in the 90's. The article is here: http://www.nytimes.com/1996/02/11/op...p=7&sq=&st=nyt



    Here's a snippet:



    "Macintoshes had no commands. They felt like cars without steering wheels.



    "Gradually it sunk in: Apple had embodied in this unassuming machine the most elusive equation in the technology world: Power plus simplicity makes elegance. Apple has done more than any other company to make technology beautiful."
  • Reply 67 of 130
    alanskyalansky Posts: 235member
    Why isn't it illegal to file patent suits in this Kangaroo Court unless you actually live in Tyler County, Texas??? What a crock!!! There is so much corruption in the U.S. legal system that the whole country has grown accustomed to the stench of it!
  • Reply 68 of 130
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,492member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vaughnsc View Post


    LOL. I would never have guessed this is only my second post (here); I'm opinionated, and read here often enough, but usually GMTA: some other poster has already eloquently expressed a comparable viewpoint.



    Me, I read the Bloomberg article first and my immediate reaction was "Wait- he/they got a patent for WHAT!? Seriously?". I then ran across this article and thought the specifics of the other article might be helpful.



    In closing, I SHOULD be more incensed than I am; but frankly, I'm no longer fazed at these shenanigans. If this hearing did indeed take 4 days ? I'm hoping that fact is incorrect and it was filed in 2008, actually started in 9/2009 ? then I certainly expect Apple to appeal the ruling and the patent, even if $281M were 'chump change.'



    I have a feeling it is neither chump change nor acceptable-in-principle to Apple.



    I agree on all points and glad I helped get you to 3 posts
  • Reply 69 of 130
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post


    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.



    Being a professor implies one thing. Persistence to finish the doctorate. That's it. Everything beyond that isn't because of the title professor, it is because of the person. And those first tier schools you mention don't only take the plenty smart, they take those who had good grades, which again is far more about persistence in doing the grind-work of homework and test prep than actual intelligence.
  • Reply 70 of 130
    shobizshobiz Posts: 207member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hiro View Post


    being a professor implies one thing. Persistence to finish the doctorate. That's it. Everything beyond that isn't because of the title professor, it is because of the person.n and those first tier schools you mention don't only take the plenty smart, they take those who had good grades, which again is far more about persistence in doing the grind-work of homework and test prep than actual intelligence.







    +1 !!!
  • Reply 71 of 130
    zc456zc456 Posts: 96member
    You're kidding. Apple had patents on Cover Flow?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    Frankly, I think apple could drop CoverFlow completely and no one would notice.



    To be honest, I never really did use it that much when I was on my Mac.
  • Reply 72 of 130
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hiro View Post


    Being a professor implies one thing. Persistence to finish the doctorate. That's it. Everything beyond that isn't because of the title professor, it is because of the person.n And those first tier schools you mention don't only take the plenty smart, they take those who had good grades, which again is far more about persistence in doing the grind-work of homework and test prep than actual intelligence.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SHOBIZ View Post


    +1 !!!



    Wow.



    The internetz is such a wonderful thing. It is simply amazing to behold its ability to enable folks like you to inhabit a world about which you know nothing!

  • Reply 73 of 130
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nagromme View Post


    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.)



    And, where did you find facts to back up assertions like these?
  • Reply 74 of 130
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post


    I never use CoverFlow, either, and don't know anyone who does. They could easily drop it, IMO, and few would notice.



    Patents are an odd beast, at best.



    I agree with both sentiments.



    I used coverflow for a couple of days after it originally came out. After that, pretty much never. And, while patents create the incentive to innovate, they can also paradoxically, stifle innovation by others.
  • Reply 75 of 130
    mgl323mgl323 Posts: 247member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nicolbolas View Post


    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.





    He probably meant this little trick on windows.. Press the Windows key and Tab at the same time, and you'll see what he meant.
  • Reply 76 of 130
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,001member
    I have a totally cool idea for time travel I'm thinking of patenting. I expect to get acknowledged for my invention, too, by the first person to implement a time machine, becuz I really wouldn't know how to build one myself.
  • Reply 77 of 130
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Imagine having to do a complete inventory of a music. grocery, book or video store by using an a swiping motion and having to look at an image instead of using it’s name or metadata/ISBN/UPC.



    Who would ever ever suggest that? Let me reassure you that Spotlight is my primary search start. Name, contents, file kind, etc., in that order. Smart folders…tons of them.



    Quote:

    Imagine if Dewey didn’t invent the decimal system but the index card CoverFlow system to locate books.



    Or that? My main search engine pulses a library of over 20 million files. And without Cover Flow.



    Quote:

    That would take much longer on all counts. That is the point with me, and probably with everyone else on this thread. For items that we own we are much more likely to know what we want and want the fastest access to it, thus making CoverFlow less than ideal for iPod, iTunes and Finder.



    Bull. As in order, then Cover Flow, (along with Quick Look), is an optimal tool to help enhance and finalize search strategies.



    This is even more applicable today as hard drives are now being offered in the terabyte range. Thousands of images, photos, videos, etc., are being viewed continuously and to suggest we are much more likely to know what we want and simply type in a file name, let alone meta data and we can't even spell the name as simple as Cover Flow, is questionable.



    I might add that it seems that a number of decisions are made by simply skimming over 'new' innovations. As the first response to the iPad, iPhone, Sherlock, iTunes, etc., etc., has evidenced.
  • Reply 78 of 130
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Onhka View Post


    Who would ever ever suggest that? Let me reassure you that Spotlight is my primary search start. Name, contents, file kind, etc., in that order. Smart folders?tons of them.



    Or that? My main search engine pulses a library of over 20 million files. And without Cover Flow.



    Bull. As in order, Cover Flow, (along with Quick Look), is an optimal tool to help enhance and finalize search strategies.



    This is even more applicable today as hard drives are now being offered in the terabyte range. Thousands of images, photos, videos, etc., are being viewed continuously and to suggest we are much more likely to know what we want and can't even spell the name of the file correctly, as in Cover Flow, not CoverFlow, is questionable.



    1) You are the one that suggested a "music, grocery, book, video or any store for that matter, and even a library?,



    2) I use Quick Look, just not Cover Flow, expect for the previous example given which doesn?t look to be Cover Flow itself though probably using the same underlying technology.



    3) I can?t understand why you would have a problem with use not using Cover Flow. It?s great that you find this to be a great resource, but I don?t. I have under 300 songs in my iTunes folder right now and know exactly what song I want without the need for the album cover to find it. Why is that a problem for you?



    4) I have terabytes of video stored and have yet to need Cover Flow to because I have organized them into folders, with proper names and metadata, as previously stated. This would do nothing but slow down my searches if I looked for items by this methods, as previously stated. It?s great that it works for you and no one is saying you are wrong to use it, as previously stated. So why exactly do you take issue with others not needing it? Why do you think it hurts the usefulness you find from it?



    5) The idea that you are bothered by the compressing Cover Flow into CoverFlow when you have to know Apple uses camel-case on many of it?s products kind of says something about your obsession with this, which points to a lack of objectivity in this matter. Are you really questioning whether we?ve ever used fLOW-qUICK or lOOK-qUICK because of the exclusion of a space? Re-ally?
  • Reply 79 of 130
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,756member
    I might not use CoverFlow that much, but I don't know where I'd be without Quickloook and icon previews.



    As for Time Machine, it seems to be the best implementation of its kind.
  • Reply 80 of 130
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,492member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Onhka View Post


    First of all, Cover Flow and Time Machine, as well as Quick Look are composed of two single words, i.e., separated by a space.



    Ha ha I had not even noticed! Thanks for the correction. My brain must have been altered with all those wonderful products like the MacBook, MacPro and of course QuickTime and heck all the way back to ... SilentWriter, AppleWriter and ImageWriter etc. I guess. I just 'see' all those Apple names like that now!
Sign In or Register to comment.