Motorola developed the first prototype commercial use portable cellular telephone handset (the DynaTAC) in '74. But it was Bell labs that put together the first workable commercial cellular system in the US in 1984 - without which the DynaTAC couldn't work. However it was NTT in Japan in '79 that produced the global first full system of 1st gen cellular voice networking, followed closely by the NMT system in Scandinavia in '81. The DynaTAC would not become available to the commercial market until 1984. The Simon Personal Communicator, by IBM and BellSouth, was the first mobile phone to add PDA features, including pager, calculator, address book, fax machine, and e-mail device in a 20oz package costing $900 - released in '93. The lightweight Motorola StarTAC was released in 1996, and was the fore-bearer of the modern flip-phone style.
So to get your dates correct: Apple was incorporated in mid '76 and its first IPO was in '80. In fact no, Moto wasn't in it such a long time before Apple was doing business, and it can be successfully argued that Apple was "something" while Moto was trying to produce the StarTAC. Being "in the biznizz" and actually being commercially successful are two different benchmarks by the way. So the StarTAC - being Moto's first commercially available consumer cell phone was trotted out in 1996, the next year Steve Jobs returned to pull Apple out of it's death spiral and the rest, is history. You should read up on these technologies sometime. The rapidity with which these things developed is very exciting when you know what you are talking about.
Just to comment history, the 1G generation networks opened as you described, although Saudi Arabia opened their NMT network 1 month earlier than Scandinavia. But even before 1G there were many "0G" networks around the world. Motorola may have been the first to introduce "handheld device", but there were cellular networks long before that.
So the StarTAC - being Moto's first commercially available consumer cell phone was trotted out in 1996, the next year Steve Jobs returned to pull Apple out of it's death spiral and the rest, is history. You should read up on these technologies sometime. The rapidity with which these things developed is very exciting when you know what you are talking about.
Hmm. Funny. I distincly remember using a Dynatac at work in the late 80s and later the MicroTAC well before the StarTAC came to the market. Moto was a big commercial mobile phone manufacturer in the '80s. Ericsson and Nokia as well. Sure the market was much smaller, but a lot of innovation went on during that timeframe. NMT being the first roaming capable international mobile network so I'd say that Motorola being in "the biz" during that era does mean something. Possibly even patent wise, but I believe Moto's patents are not the topic here, rather the validity of Apple's.
Apple has been playing by the rules and revolutionized the industry (again).
For the first argument, the court hasn't even been formed yet (waiting for the ITC case to play out first). Therefore too early to say. The latter, I agree.
And Moto doesn't own any significant IP in the GSM licensing be used in the current GSM phonesets, unlike Nokia who is trying to extort extra special fees from whoever they can. Especially Apple.
Not quite. Take a look at the chart here: http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/29/n...epth-analysis/ Motorola has the third largest portion of Essential (i.e. thought to be strong) patents in GSM. Motorola has many more patents, that's only the "Essential"-list. Motorola's GSM patent list is significantly larger than Apple's in that area. That still doesn't mean that Apple's own suit couldn't be valid in my book but gives also no reason to bad mouth Motorola for not inventing stuff.
The claim about Nokia extorting money again rears its head without much proof. Since you apparently know something about patent law, could you please provide a valid reference to the claim that Nokia tries to extort extra special fees from whoever they can.
The only proof I know of is Apple's claim in their response to the Nokia suit. Nokia strongly refuted that claim. So I don't take either company's statement as proof. I take them merely as claims and name-calling until real proof is brought out into the public.
2. If you have have ever applied for a patent, raise your hand.
3. Heck, if you have ever had a copyright, raise your hand.
I am willing to bet the sum total of 1-3 is 0 or close to 0.
Nop. You automatically own the copyright of anything you have written, any paints you have made, any photographs you have taken, any code you have written, etc. The list goes on. You don't need to apply for it. Is automatic. So for the sum to be close to zero, remove 3 from your list.
The interesting thing here is Motorola are not trying to block the iPhone. They are trying to get the patents declared invalid so later on Apple cannot use them against Motorola. Even if Apple loses it shouldn't impact the iPhone.
Apple gets to revolutionize the industry. Android handsets are improved to counter Apple. Apple improves the iPhone to stay ahead. The consumer wins.
They aren't going to lose, period.
All these patents are what scare the crap out of Motorola, Google and even Microsoft. Every OS today, is Object-Oriented, to a greater and lesser extent. The Android platform isn't C. The messaging system and design from NeXT and Taligent pioneered what the rest of the industry has continued to use w/o being charged for royalties.
Apple now is defending itself after Nokia took the first shot.
Motorola obviously believe that Apple will sue them next after they finish with HTC. Apple v HTC is really a test run for Apple v Android and Motorola is betting big on Android. What we are seeing here is a preemptive move to disarm Apple before it goes after Motorola.
I just wish all these firms would try to win by creating better products and not simply try to block the competition.
Motorola is pre-empting (or trying to pre-empt) Apple's entry into the CDMA spectrum, first with Verizon very soon then T-mobile, cutting the ground off from their recovery with the aid of Android.
Apple's new plans with iPad and iPhone are a direct response to Android's rise in the USA, and threaten to derail Google's influence in the mobile sector, and with it the revival hopes of LG, SonyEricsson and Motorola.
All very tiresome. The endless lawsuits are completely out of control. Everyone is suing everyone over the same stuff. If it wasn't so pathetic it would be funny.
Perhaps you need to reflect on how this once-great company ended up in the pile of shiznit that it did. (Hint: Product lineup).
They sat on their ass and failed to continue innovating, just like GM and countless other companies, but I think they're doing a good job of righting their ship.
I have several bonafide full copyrights under my possession, and a large body of common copyright material beyond that. I have a large group of associates that between them have over ten thousand patents in ownership and one, a metallurgist friend, who alone holds over a thousand active patents by himself. On top of that I have worked on litigation involving intellectual property for a number of landmark lawsuits in the US.
My point? I'm not out here demanding that the average commenter put-up or shut-up on this topic. Everyone here - even you, is entitled to offer an opinion. However, the consistent tone of your commentary has afforded me the opportunity to add you to my ignore list - you're intolerant and worthy to be ignored.
you people who think that 'notifying' a poster that they are being added to your ignore list make me laugh out loud. no one cares about your ignore list.
Is that so? Before Apple started to pollute your mind (and everyone else), Motorolla has been rated in the past as having the highest rate of quality control and one of the highest customer satisfaction ratings.
Any chance you don't have a clue what you're talking about? Very likely.
So the StarTAC - being Moto's first commercially available consumer cell phone was trotted out in 1996, the next year Steve Jobs returned to pull Apple out of it's death spiral and the rest, is history. You should read up on these technologies sometime. The rapidity with which these things developed is very exciting when you know what you are talking about.
I had Motorola mobile phone in 1986, and I had waited a couple of years for the price to come down.
"They have the golden arches. We have the golden arcs."
"We both use two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, and cheese, but their buns have sesame seeds, ours do not."
don't forget you have to eat the burger in the patented way too. thats what 'pinch to zoom' is doing. using 2 hands to move it to your mouth can only be used if eating BigMac. If eating Burger King you CAN use 2 hands but only if you are shoving it up your arse. Wendy's has patent on using 1 hand to shove it up there....
The only ones who win in all this mess are the sharks. End all software patents now and let's get on with life... Oh, wait, the whole system was created by and supports the folks who feed it, what was I thinking? And that, my friends, is why an unlocked iPhone costs $600 - $184 in parts and $416 in attorney's fees.
Comments
Motorola developed the first prototype commercial use portable cellular telephone handset (the DynaTAC) in '74. But it was Bell labs that put together the first workable commercial cellular system in the US in 1984 - without which the DynaTAC couldn't work. However it was NTT in Japan in '79 that produced the global first full system of 1st gen cellular voice networking, followed closely by the NMT system in Scandinavia in '81. The DynaTAC would not become available to the commercial market until 1984. The Simon Personal Communicator, by IBM and BellSouth, was the first mobile phone to add PDA features, including pager, calculator, address book, fax machine, and e-mail device in a 20oz package costing $900 - released in '93. The lightweight Motorola StarTAC was released in 1996, and was the fore-bearer of the modern flip-phone style.
So to get your dates correct: Apple was incorporated in mid '76 and its first IPO was in '80. In fact no, Moto wasn't in it such a long time before Apple was doing business, and it can be successfully argued that Apple was "something" while Moto was trying to produce the StarTAC. Being "in the biznizz" and actually being commercially successful are two different benchmarks by the way. So the StarTAC - being Moto's first commercially available consumer cell phone was trotted out in 1996, the next year Steve Jobs returned to pull Apple out of it's death spiral and the rest, is history. You should read up on these technologies sometime. The rapidity with which these things developed is very exciting when you know what you are talking about.
Just to comment history, the 1G generation networks opened as you described, although Saudi Arabia opened their NMT network 1 month earlier than Scandinavia. But even before 1G there were many "0G" networks around the world. Motorola may have been the first to introduce "handheld device", but there were cellular networks long before that.
So the StarTAC - being Moto's first commercially available consumer cell phone was trotted out in 1996, the next year Steve Jobs returned to pull Apple out of it's death spiral and the rest, is history. You should read up on these technologies sometime. The rapidity with which these things developed is very exciting when you know what you are talking about.
Hmm. Funny. I distincly remember using a Dynatac at work in the late 80s and later the MicroTAC well before the StarTAC came to the market. Moto was a big commercial mobile phone manufacturer in the '80s. Ericsson and Nokia as well. Sure the market was much smaller, but a lot of innovation went on during that timeframe. NMT being the first roaming capable international mobile network so I'd say that Motorola being in "the biz" during that era does mean something. Possibly even patent wise, but I believe Moto's patents are not the topic here, rather the validity of Apple's.
Regs, Jarkko
Apple has been playing by the rules and revolutionized the industry (again).
For the first argument, the court hasn't even been formed yet (waiting for the ITC case to play out first). Therefore too early to say. The latter, I agree.
And Moto doesn't own any significant IP in the GSM licensing be used in the current GSM phonesets, unlike Nokia who is trying to extort extra special fees from whoever they can. Especially Apple.
Not quite. Take a look at the chart here: http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/29/n...epth-analysis/ Motorola has the third largest portion of Essential (i.e. thought to be strong) patents in GSM. Motorola has many more patents, that's only the "Essential"-list. Motorola's GSM patent list is significantly larger than Apple's in that area. That still doesn't mean that Apple's own suit couldn't be valid in my book but gives also no reason to bad mouth Motorola for not inventing stuff.
The claim about Nokia extorting money again rears its head without much proof. Since you apparently know something about patent law, could you please provide a valid reference to the claim that Nokia tries to extort extra special fees from whoever they can.
The only proof I know of is Apple's claim in their response to the Nokia suit. Nokia strongly refuted that claim. So I don't take either company's statement as proof. I take them merely as claims and name-calling until real proof is brought out into the public.
Regs, Jarkko
Last quarter they posted a ~$250 million profit. Take out legal settlements and they actually made a ~$50 million loss.
Ok, everyone who has posted here:
1. If you have a patent, raise your hand.
2. If you have have ever applied for a patent, raise your hand.
3. Heck, if you have ever had a copyright, raise your hand.
I am willing to bet the sum total of 1-3 is 0 or close to 0.
2 (multiple patents too)
Ok, everyone who has posted here:
1. If you have a patent, raise your hand.
2. If you have have ever applied for a patent, raise your hand.
3. Heck, if you have ever had a copyright, raise your hand.
I am willing to bet the sum total of 1-3 is 0 or close to 0.
Nop. You automatically own the copyright of anything you have written, any paints you have made, any photographs you have taken, any code you have written, etc. The list goes on. You don't need to apply for it. Is automatic. So for the sum to be close to zero, remove 3 from your list.
Ok, everyone who has posted here:
1. If you have a patent, raise your hand.
2. If you have have ever applied for a patent, raise your hand.
3. Heck, if you have ever had a copyright, raise your hand.
I am willing to bet the sum total of 1-3 is 0 or close to 0.
I am named on 2 patents, but know nothing about defending them if needed.
The interesting thing here is Motorola are not trying to block the iPhone. They are trying to get the patents declared invalid so later on Apple cannot use them against Motorola. Even if Apple loses it shouldn't impact the iPhone.
Apple gets to revolutionize the industry. Android handsets are improved to counter Apple. Apple improves the iPhone to stay ahead. The consumer wins.
They aren't going to lose, period.
All these patents are what scare the crap out of Motorola, Google and even Microsoft. Every OS today, is Object-Oriented, to a greater and lesser extent. The Android platform isn't C. The messaging system and design from NeXT and Taligent pioneered what the rest of the industry has continued to use w/o being charged for royalties.
Apple now is defending itself after Nokia took the first shot.
Motorola obviously believe that Apple will sue them next after they finish with HTC. Apple v HTC is really a test run for Apple v Android and Motorola is betting big on Android. What we are seeing here is a preemptive move to disarm Apple before it goes after Motorola.
I just wish all these firms would try to win by creating better products and not simply try to block the competition.
Motorola is pre-empting (or trying to pre-empt) Apple's entry into the CDMA spectrum, first with Verizon very soon then T-mobile, cutting the ground off from their recovery with the aid of Android.
Apple's new plans with iPad and iPhone are a direct response to Android's rise in the USA, and threaten to derail Google's influence in the mobile sector, and with it the revival hopes of LG, SonyEricsson and Motorola.
All very tiresome. The endless lawsuits are completely out of control. Everyone is suing everyone over the same stuff. If it wasn't so pathetic it would be funny.
/sigh
wow
too much
9
Yes, shiznit.
Perhaps you need to reflect on how this once-great company ended up in the pile of shiznit that it did. (Hint: Product lineup).
They sat on their ass and failed to continue innovating, just like GM and countless other companies, but I think they're doing a good job of righting their ship.
SO let's throw down gr -
I have several bonafide full copyrights under my possession, and a large body of common copyright material beyond that. I have a large group of associates that between them have over ten thousand patents in ownership and one, a metallurgist friend, who alone holds over a thousand active patents by himself. On top of that I have worked on litigation involving intellectual property for a number of landmark lawsuits in the US.
My point? I'm not out here demanding that the average commenter put-up or shut-up on this topic. Everyone here - even you, is entitled to offer an opinion. However, the consistent tone of your commentary has afforded me the opportunity to add you to my ignore list - you're intolerant and worthy to be ignored.
you people who think that 'notifying' a poster that they are being added to your ignore list make me laugh out loud. no one cares about your ignore list.
All third-rate.
Is that so? Before Apple started to pollute your mind (and everyone else), Motorolla has been rated in the past as having the highest rate of quality control and one of the highest customer satisfaction ratings.
Any chance you don't have a clue what you're talking about? Very likely.
Riiiight.... you know Motorola, the company which is sooo incredibly innovative that they invented.... (crickets chirping)
So the StarTAC - being Moto's first commercially available consumer cell phone was trotted out in 1996, the next year Steve Jobs returned to pull Apple out of it's death spiral and the rest, is history. You should read up on these technologies sometime. The rapidity with which these things developed is very exciting when you know what you are talking about.
I had Motorola mobile phone in 1986, and I had waited a couple of years for the price to come down.
.
It's like McDonald's suing Burger King because Burger King puts a meat patty and cheese between 2 halves of a bun.
"They have the golden arches. We have the golden arcs."
"We both use two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, and cheese, but their buns have sesame seeds, ours do not."
"They have the golden arches. We have the golden arcs."
"We both use two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, and cheese, but their buns have sesame seeds, ours do not."
don't forget you have to eat the burger in the patented way too. thats what 'pinch to zoom' is doing. using 2 hands to move it to your mouth can only be used if eating BigMac. If eating Burger King you CAN use 2 hands but only if you are shoving it up your arse. Wendy's has patent on using 1 hand to shove it up there....
All of these suits should keep a HUGE PILE of Lawyers off the streets
And in a courtroom where someone of responsibility can keep an eye on them
.