Apple now has a patent for multi-touch. Which other Android handset maker has such a patent? Since I'm sure you fully understand the Apple patent completely, please inform us as to how the Android multi-touch not violating Apple's patent?
Once a disruptive technology hits the market, it takes time to see whether it's worth copying. Had the iPhone been a total flop, the Android of 2011 would probably look exactly like Blackberry's OS, a la the prototype Android phone. As for the delay between the iPhone's release and the Android knock-off offerings, even the best copy-artists need time to get all their crap in one sock.
And that sock full of crap, i.e. a touch UI bolted on the BB rip off at the last minute, has some pretty bad flaws that nothing but a rewrite from the ground up will cure. That would break existing apps. Ain't life a bitch.
Agreed he suffers from Hoof and Mouth, but I still don't think he ever said they "copied" iOS. Your link, while offering a smorgasbord of poorly conceived Schmidt statements, didn't indicate he ever served that one up either.
Don't think it will happen. I Could be wrong but the combined android manufacturers and google have more money then apple and if apple tries this it will see a full scale retaliation. To be honest I don't think apple would want to risk the fallout.
Why do people want to see android die. Live and let live. Apple does not need to destroy its competition to succeed. So why do many of you want it to.
The iPhone is a Damn good phone and you know what so is the Galaxy Nexus. let the people enjoy the phone they want. the iPhone is not the end all of phones. It is not going to fit everyone's needs. It works for millions but for everyone else there is android.
If apple were to licence there features to android and everytime they can out with a new device samsung or others copied the designs this would cause huge damage to apple and there credilibity ...where would apple's unique products be then.
i think if apple were able to just hold onto there IP and overtime more and more people will move from android to a better phone and operating system which is really where i see it going as people get more educated about there phones and its uses,this method could lead to android producing there own unique patents and then the public will become the winner.
Apple has build it rep over many many years and is winning not against android but from within and to its old and new audience...its producing a large amount of products to a large audience...and people are not leaving them.
Don't think it will happen. I Could be wrong but the combined android manufacturers and google have more money then apple and if apple tries this it will see a full scale retaliation. To be honest I don't think apple would want to risk the fallout.
Why do people want to see android die. Live and let live. Apple does not need to destroy its competition to succeed. So why do many of you want it to.
The iPhone is a Damn good phone and you know what so is the Galaxy Nexus. let the people enjoy the phone they want. the iPhone is not the end all of phones. It is not going to fit everyone's needs. It works for millions but for everyone else there is android.
people want to see android come up with things and not steal things...we want people rewarded in a fair system...just like OWS>>haha
ANDROID IS ALLOWING OTHERS TO DESTROY IT BY STEALING...ITS THERE CHOICE...AND HONESTLY ITS NOT DYING REALLY, IT COULD BE BUILDING SOMETHING FOR NOTHING LONG TERM THOUGH, BECAUSE OF ITS WAY OF GOING BUSINESS AND BETWEEN ORACLE AND APPLE IT COULD BE GAME OVER.
And that sock full of crap, i.e. a touch UI bolted on the BB rip off at the last minute, has some pretty bad flaws that nothing but a rewrite from the ground up will cure. That would break existing apps. Ain't life a bitch.
Last minute is right...
The phone below is what Palm announced just 2 days before Apple announced the iPhone.
In fact... most smartphones of the day looked like this. NONE of those companies had any idea what was coming... and I doubt they would have stumbled upon the next big thing on their own.
This is the type of phone that manufacturers were producing back then... and I'm pretty sure Android would have found its way onto phones just like this. We've even seen the prototype.
Now... there was a full-touchscreen Android protoype as well... but would manufacturers be quick to launch a new type of phone running a brand new OS?
I'm not so sure. Palm and RIM were doing their own thing... so Android would be of no use to them.
Samsung, HTC, Motorola and LG were already making smartphones using a variety of OSes. They were using PalmOS, Windows Mobile, or their own proprietary OS. Android could have been an option... but I'm not sure they were convinced of its usefulness quite yet.
Then the iPhone came.
And the scrambling began. What were these companies gonna do? PalmOS and Windows Mobile were not the answer. And their hardware wasn't up to snuff anyway.
The fact that it took a full year after the iPhone to come up with the first Android phone is proof that none of these companies had any plans in the works. Samsung's first Android phone was 2 years after the iPhone.
The manufacturers got caught with their pants down... and Google was now their savior.
So what did Google do? Take cues from Apple. A lot of cues. I'm pretty sure Android would look nothing like it did if it wasn't for the iPhone.
Why would it? Android would have been competing against the Blackberry and the Treo. I don't think even Google had the next big idea... but they sure knew what to do after the iPhone.
Unlike Microsoft who is truly a Software Corporation Apple is the entire end-to-end solution.
To license their hard earned IP for 3rd parties to clone is to cannibalize their n-tier sales.
It's not going to happen.
Apple owns the profits in the Embedded World.
Apple is now the embodiment of Steven P. Jobs.
Get over the idea that they will change course and pull a Scully.
It's never going to happen.
Android will be destroyed by Oracle and Apple, unless it changes it's violations of both Java [and other Oracle IP] and Apple's IP.
People used to ask us @NeXT how come the Openstep Initiative failed.
SUN Microsystems wanted 100% of the Profits and to provide a small percentage of sales to NeXT in order to run Openstep on SUN Hardware.
SUN just couldn't get it.
Now we have the OS and the Hardware married like NeXT, but in mature markets and now we have the same foundation in the Embedded space driving both markets.
Apple is growing all categories of their hardware and software.
The perceived increase in Revenue from licensing will be dwarfed by one quarter of iTV sales and the iPad 3 sales 5 years of licensing could ever offer.
It's economically insulting and ethically insulting to the very mantra of Apple's ethos.
Somebody did an interesting analysis a while ago of just ONE of the parents in question. It has to do with the little "bounce" animation that happens when you're scrolling down (or up) a list or a window and reach the of it. Boing! You know.
The writer's point was -- and Apple's point is -- that they invented this cool thing, and only they should be allowed to use it. I don't know jack about patent law, so I have no opinion about the legal merit of this point of view, but as Wings points out, this isn't about the money. It's about Apple preserving its unique user experience.
[Wow, autocorrect magically understood whether I wanted "it's" or "its" in each case in the previous sentence. Siri must be having a salutary effect on those pesky algorithms.]
What Apple wants, apparently, is to force Android designers to drop the bounce, thus making the user experience one tiny degree less cool. Extrapolate this effect over the whole field of patents involved, and I should think it results in a notable downgrade, or at best a tangible lateral shift, in the overall Android UX. Users may not even consciously register this effect on a feature-by-feature level, but they'll get that Android just doesn't feel as good, or as "alive," or (to use a favorite Jobs term) as delightful as the Apple experience.
It's hard to quantify this. How many billion $USD is "delight" worth? I'd say it's like having slightly better armor on a battlefield. You don't want the opposing generals to pay you for the right to upgrade their tanks. You want your tanks to be better, full stop.
hard to improve on your comments. Android is stealing and $10 or $100 per device doesn't compensate for that. The rhetorical question would be, "Is it OK for a pickpocket to give the police $10" for every wallet he 'borrows'?"
Somebody did an interesting analysis a while ago of just ONE of the parents in question. It has to do with the little "bounce" animation that happens when you're scrolling down (or up) a list or a window and reach the of it. Boing! You know.
The writer's point was -- and Apple's point is -- that they invented this cool thing, and only they should be allowed to use it. I don't know jack about patent law, so I have no opinion about the legal merit of this point of view, but as Wings points out, this isn't about the money. It's about Apple preserving its unique user experience.
[Wow, autocorrect magically understood whether I wanted "it's" or "its" in each case in the previous sentence. Siri must be having a salutary effect on those pesky algorithms.]
What Apple wants, apparently, is to force Android designers to drop the bounce, thus making the user experience one tiny degree less cool. Extrapolate this effect over the whole field of patents involved, and I should think it results in a notable downgrade, or at best a tangible lateral shift, in the overall Android UX. Users may not even consciously register this effect on a feature-by-feature level, but they'll get that Android just doesn't feel as good, or as "alive," or (to use a favorite Jobs term) as delightful as the Apple experience.
It's hard to quantify this. How many billion $USD is "delight" worth? I'd say it's like having slightly better armor on a battlefield. You don't want the opposing generals to pay you for the right to upgrade their tanks. You want your tanks to be better, full stop.
Android and iOS barely share any superficial similarities and hardly any functional ones. Period. So far no one has listed how they are. Without bringing up cases based on broad IP.
Also. What is wrong with competition evolving rapidly, slowly, failing, succeeding, after a market paradigm dramatically shifts?
If a game changer is introduced is no one else allowed to play the new game?
You seem sure that Android OS has never utilized any bouncing of texts or elements but are you sure there is nothing in Android OS that assists developers in making f text and elements bounce by supplying an API?
That is quite an insight. Thanks for that. But you know it is a lost cause - you are trying to have a discussion with a troll. Nothing you say will make him change his opinion.
Android and iOS barely share any superficial similarities and hardly any functional ones. Period. So far no one has listed how they are. Without bringing up cases based on broad IP.
Also. What is wrong with competition evolving rapidly, slowly, failing, succeeding, after a market paradigm dramatically shifts?
If a game changer is introduced is no one else allowed to play the new game?
My point was.... look at the phones everyone else was releasing at the time. Palm, RIM, Samsung, Motorola and others made a certain type of smartphone for years... and none of them had anything new on the horizon.
Then phones started looking like what Apple was doing... and they were all running Android.
Coincidence?
Google had obviously been working on Android for years. But was the plan all along to complete Android and ship the HTC Dream G1 in October 2008?
Or did Google and the manufacturers have to step back and say "oh shit... we gotta do something else" after January 9, 2007?
The timing is suspicious. Apple produces a game changer... and everyone else changes what they're doing.
My issue is not with any similarities that iOS and Android share now.
It's that Google/Android and the manufacturers probably had no desire to start making full-touchscreen phones until Apple did it. It's the principle of the matter.
Hell... even RIM made the Storm. Would RIM have even attempted that abortion of a phone if it wasn't for the iPhone?
My point was.... look at the phones everyone else was releasing at the time. Palm, RIM, Samsung, Motorola and others made a certain type of smartphone for years... and none of them had anything new on the horizon.
Then phones started looking like what Apple was doing... and they were all running Android.
Coincidence?
Google had obviously been working on Android for years. But was the plan all along to complete Android and ship the HTC Dream G1 in October 2008?
Or did Google and the manufacturers have to step back and say "oh shit... we gotta do something else" after January 9, 2007?
The timing is suspicious. Apple produces a game changer... and everyone else changes what they're doing.
My issue is not with any similarities that iOS and Android share now.
It's that Google/Android and the manufacturers probably had no desire to start making full-touchscreen phones until Apple did it. It's the principle of the matter.
Hell... even RIM made the Storm. Would RIM have even attempted that abortion of a phone if it wasn't for the iPhone?
No. And wp7 wouldn't have existed as is nor would webOS nor any modern OS. That's life. That's technology. That's progress.
It's been that way for centuries. Yet now companies look to block all elements of inspiration through litigation.
Comments
Apple now has a patent for multi-touch. Which other Android handset maker has such a patent? Since I'm sure you fully understand the Apple patent completely, please inform us as to how the Android multi-touch not violating Apple's patent?
Once a disruptive technology hits the market, it takes time to see whether it's worth copying. Had the iPhone been a total flop, the Android of 2011 would probably look exactly like Blackberry's OS, a la the prototype Android phone. As for the delay between the iPhone's release and the Android knock-off offerings, even the best copy-artists need time to get all their crap in one sock.
And that sock full of crap, i.e. a touch UI bolted on the BB rip off at the last minute, has some pretty bad flaws that nothing but a rewrite from the ground up will cure. That would break existing apps. Ain't life a bitch.
Agreed he suffers from Hoof and Mouth, but I still don't think he ever said they "copied" iOS. Your link, while offering a smorgasbord of poorly conceived Schmidt statements, didn't indicate he ever served that one up either.
It's a cloven hoof too!
Why do people want to see android die. Live and let live. Apple does not need to destroy its competition to succeed. So why do many of you want it to.
The iPhone is a Damn good phone and you know what so is the Galaxy Nexus. let the people enjoy the phone they want. the iPhone is not the end all of phones. It is not going to fit everyone's needs. It works for millions but for everyone else there is android.
i think if apple were able to just hold onto there IP and overtime more and more people will move from android to a better phone and operating system which is really where i see it going as people get more educated about there phones and its uses,this method could lead to android producing there own unique patents and then the public will become the winner.
Apple has build it rep over many many years and is winning not against android but from within and to its old and new audience...its producing a large amount of products to a large audience...and people are not leaving them.
Don't think it will happen. I Could be wrong but the combined android manufacturers and google have more money then apple and if apple tries this it will see a full scale retaliation. To be honest I don't think apple would want to risk the fallout.
Why do people want to see android die. Live and let live. Apple does not need to destroy its competition to succeed. So why do many of you want it to.
The iPhone is a Damn good phone and you know what so is the Galaxy Nexus. let the people enjoy the phone they want. the iPhone is not the end all of phones. It is not going to fit everyone's needs. It works for millions but for everyone else there is android.
people want to see android come up with things and not steal things...we want people rewarded in a fair system...just like OWS>>haha
ANDROID IS ALLOWING OTHERS TO DESTROY IT BY STEALING...ITS THERE CHOICE...AND HONESTLY ITS NOT DYING REALLY, IT COULD BE BUILDING SOMETHING FOR NOTHING LONG TERM THOUGH, BECAUSE OF ITS WAY OF GOING BUSINESS AND BETWEEN ORACLE AND APPLE IT COULD BE GAME OVER.
Why do people want to use excessively large fonts to get noticed instead of taking the time to write something thought provoking?
Reciprocity does not always help.
And that sock full of crap, i.e. a touch UI bolted on the BB rip off at the last minute, has some pretty bad flaws that nothing but a rewrite from the ground up will cure. That would break existing apps. Ain't life a bitch.
Last minute is right...
The phone below is what Palm announced just 2 days before Apple announced the iPhone.
In fact... most smartphones of the day looked like this. NONE of those companies had any idea what was coming... and I doubt they would have stumbled upon the next big thing on their own.
This is the type of phone that manufacturers were producing back then... and I'm pretty sure Android would have found its way onto phones just like this. We've even seen the prototype.
Now... there was a full-touchscreen Android protoype as well... but would manufacturers be quick to launch a new type of phone running a brand new OS?
I'm not so sure. Palm and RIM were doing their own thing... so Android would be of no use to them.
Samsung, HTC, Motorola and LG were already making smartphones using a variety of OSes. They were using PalmOS, Windows Mobile, or their own proprietary OS. Android could have been an option... but I'm not sure they were convinced of its usefulness quite yet.
Then the iPhone came.
And the scrambling began. What were these companies gonna do? PalmOS and Windows Mobile were not the answer. And their hardware wasn't up to snuff anyway.
The fact that it took a full year after the iPhone to come up with the first Android phone is proof that none of these companies had any plans in the works. Samsung's first Android phone was 2 years after the iPhone.
The manufacturers got caught with their pants down... and Google was now their savior.
So what did Google do? Take cues from Apple. A lot of cues. I'm pretty sure Android would look nothing like it did if it wasn't for the iPhone.
Why would it? Android would have been competing against the Blackberry and the Treo. I don't think even Google had the next big idea... but they sure knew what to do after the iPhone.
To license their hard earned IP for 3rd parties to clone is to cannibalize their n-tier sales.
It's not going to happen.
Apple owns the profits in the Embedded World.
Apple is now the embodiment of Steven P. Jobs.
Get over the idea that they will change course and pull a Scully.
It's never going to happen.
Android will be destroyed by Oracle and Apple, unless it changes it's violations of both Java [and other Oracle IP] and Apple's IP.
People used to ask us @NeXT how come the Openstep Initiative failed.
SUN Microsystems wanted 100% of the Profits and to provide a small percentage of sales to NeXT in order to run Openstep on SUN Hardware.
SUN just couldn't get it.
Now we have the OS and the Hardware married like NeXT, but in mature markets and now we have the same foundation in the Embedded space driving both markets.
Apple is growing all categories of their hardware and software.
The perceived increase in Revenue from licensing will be dwarfed by one quarter of iTV sales and the iPad 3 sales 5 years of licensing could ever offer.
It's economically insulting and ethically insulting to the very mantra of Apple's ethos.
This exactissimo.
Somebody did an interesting analysis a while ago of just ONE of the parents in question. It has to do with the little "bounce" animation that happens when you're scrolling down (or up) a list or a window and reach the of it. Boing! You know.
The writer's point was -- and Apple's point is -- that they invented this cool thing, and only they should be allowed to use it. I don't know jack about patent law, so I have no opinion about the legal merit of this point of view, but as Wings points out, this isn't about the money. It's about Apple preserving its unique user experience.
[Wow, autocorrect magically understood whether I wanted "it's" or "its" in each case in the previous sentence. Siri must be having a salutary effect on those pesky algorithms.]
What Apple wants, apparently, is to force Android designers to drop the bounce, thus making the user experience one tiny degree less cool. Extrapolate this effect over the whole field of patents involved, and I should think it results in a notable downgrade, or at best a tangible lateral shift, in the overall Android UX. Users may not even consciously register this effect on a feature-by-feature level, but they'll get that Android just doesn't feel as good, or as "alive," or (to use a favorite Jobs term) as delightful as the Apple experience.
It's hard to quantify this. How many billion $USD is "delight" worth? I'd say it's like having slightly better armor on a battlefield. You don't want the opposing generals to pay you for the right to upgrade their tanks. You want your tanks to be better, full stop.
hard to improve on your comments. Android is stealing and $10 or $100 per device doesn't compensate for that. The rhetorical question would be, "Is it OK for a pickpocket to give the police $10" for every wallet he 'borrows'?"
This exactissimo.
Somebody did an interesting analysis a while ago of just ONE of the parents in question. It has to do with the little "bounce" animation that happens when you're scrolling down (or up) a list or a window and reach the of it. Boing! You know.
The writer's point was -- and Apple's point is -- that they invented this cool thing, and only they should be allowed to use it. I don't know jack about patent law, so I have no opinion about the legal merit of this point of view, but as Wings points out, this isn't about the money. It's about Apple preserving its unique user experience.
[Wow, autocorrect magically understood whether I wanted "it's" or "its" in each case in the previous sentence. Siri must be having a salutary effect on those pesky algorithms.]
What Apple wants, apparently, is to force Android designers to drop the bounce, thus making the user experience one tiny degree less cool. Extrapolate this effect over the whole field of patents involved, and I should think it results in a notable downgrade, or at best a tangible lateral shift, in the overall Android UX. Users may not even consciously register this effect on a feature-by-feature level, but they'll get that Android just doesn't feel as good, or as "alive," or (to use a favorite Jobs term) as delightful as the Apple experience.
It's hard to quantify this. How many billion $USD is "delight" worth? I'd say it's like having slightly better armor on a battlefield. You don't want the opposing generals to pay you for the right to upgrade their tanks. You want your tanks to be better, full stop.
Android has never had a bounce. Ever.
OEM skins did.
-removed for space-
Android and iOS barely share any superficial similarities and hardly any functional ones. Period. So far no one has listed how they are. Without bringing up cases based on broad IP.
Also. What is wrong with competition evolving rapidly, slowly, failing, succeeding, after a market paradigm dramatically shifts?
If a game changer is introduced is no one else allowed to play the new game?
Android has never had a bounce. Ever.
OEM skins did.
You seem sure that Android OS has never utilized any bouncing of texts or elements but are you sure there is nothing in Android OS that assists developers in making f text and elements bounce by supplying an API?
It's not a lot of assumptions...
That is quite an insight. Thanks for that. But you know it is a lost cause - you are trying to have a discussion with a troll. Nothing you say will make him change his opinion.
Why do people want to use excessively large fonts to get noticed instead of taking the time to write something thought provoking?
Speaking of which, whatever happened to Occupy Signature?
Speaking of which, whatever happened to Occupy Signature?
A mod removed it without asking but didn't touch the other person's sig, though I think they were banned shortly after.
Android and iOS barely share any superficial similarities and hardly any functional ones. Period. So far no one has listed how they are. Without bringing up cases based on broad IP.
Also. What is wrong with competition evolving rapidly, slowly, failing, succeeding, after a market paradigm dramatically shifts?
If a game changer is introduced is no one else allowed to play the new game?
My point was.... look at the phones everyone else was releasing at the time. Palm, RIM, Samsung, Motorola and others made a certain type of smartphone for years... and none of them had anything new on the horizon.
Then phones started looking like what Apple was doing... and they were all running Android.
Coincidence?
Google had obviously been working on Android for years. But was the plan all along to complete Android and ship the HTC Dream G1 in October 2008?
Or did Google and the manufacturers have to step back and say "oh shit... we gotta do something else" after January 9, 2007?
The timing is suspicious. Apple produces a game changer... and everyone else changes what they're doing.
My issue is not with any similarities that iOS and Android share now.
It's that Google/Android and the manufacturers probably had no desire to start making full-touchscreen phones until Apple did it. It's the principle of the matter.
Hell... even RIM made the Storm. Would RIM have even attempted that abortion of a phone if it wasn't for the iPhone?
My point was.... look at the phones everyone else was releasing at the time. Palm, RIM, Samsung, Motorola and others made a certain type of smartphone for years... and none of them had anything new on the horizon.
Then phones started looking like what Apple was doing... and they were all running Android.
Coincidence?
Google had obviously been working on Android for years. But was the plan all along to complete Android and ship the HTC Dream G1 in October 2008?
Or did Google and the manufacturers have to step back and say "oh shit... we gotta do something else" after January 9, 2007?
The timing is suspicious. Apple produces a game changer... and everyone else changes what they're doing.
My issue is not with any similarities that iOS and Android share now.
It's that Google/Android and the manufacturers probably had no desire to start making full-touchscreen phones until Apple did it. It's the principle of the matter.
Hell... even RIM made the Storm. Would RIM have even attempted that abortion of a phone if it wasn't for the iPhone?
No. And wp7 wouldn't have existed as is nor would webOS nor any modern OS. That's life. That's technology. That's progress.
It's been that way for centuries. Yet now companies look to block all elements of inspiration through litigation.
Because the day apple follows microsofts business strategy will be a very sad day.
Or it will be a very good day because nothing makes more sense than collecting a ton of additional revenue from your reviled rival.