I suspect you'd be similarly annoyed if someone sprinkled this forum with pro-Leninist references. No need to bring ridiculous, outdated and failed political philosophies into a tech forum.
"We aren't first movers. We're asking for something (free ride) in compensation for our slowness."
OR
"We had this kind of tech, too. We were just too friggin stupid to think of patenting it."
OR
"We just randomly steal shit without thinking of the repercussions, and then raise all hell when people start catching on."
You be the judge.
This isn't new for Google. Think back to Google Books. They felt like it was OK to simply copy every printed work they could find and publish it on the Internet without the copyright holder's permission. After enough authors complained, they asked Congress to change the laws to allow them to do it without the copyright holder's permission.
so multitouch should belong to one company?
morons.
The morons would be the people who don't understand patents and act like they do. No one said Apple should own multitouch. They said that Apple should own the rights TO THEIR OWN IMPLEMENTATION of multitouch. Google is free to come up with their own, too.
You're forgetting patent trolls. They are a clear sign of a failed patent system.
How is something that doesn't exist a sign of a failed patent system?
The problem is that all the people whining about 'patent trolls' don't understand the concept of intellectual property. A patent is property that you can buy, sell, license, use, not use, etc as you wish - just like any other property.
Think of a patent as a factory. If you own a factory, you have the right to leave it empty (unused) if you wish. You can use it yourself to product product. You can rent it out to someone else to produce product. You can wait until the rents increase to a higher level before renting it own. But no one else has the right to take over the factory simply because they don't like what the factory owner is doing with it.
Funny thing is, one of the most blatant examples of ripping oft in the mobile phone arena (behind Samsung and their shameless ripping off of Apple) is Apple's shameless ripping off of the Android notification panel.
It's not reason at all, how did that personally effect you directly?
According to your logic, one is only "allowed" to hate something if it affects them directly?
Warlords in Africa? No problem, doesn't affect me directly.
Racism? Nah, I'm white.
Child abusers? I'm not a child, what's the big deal.
In my book it's perfectly fine to be disgusted with, or even "hate," people (and organizations) that behave in detestable ways. I'm sure you'll sleep easier now :-)
According to your logic, one is only "allowed" to hate something if it affects them directly?
Warlords in Africa? No problem, doesn't affect me directly.
Racism? Nah, I'm white.
Child abusers? I'm not a child, what's the big deal.
In my book it's perfectly fine to be disgusted with, or even "hate," people (and organizations) that behave in detestable ways. I'm sure you'll sleep easier now :-)
Good point, now show me where Google is a Warlord, Racist or a Child abuser.
People still mock Siri even if it is useful...and who mocked multitouch?
Point is Apple didn't invent multitouch and without the other companies actually advancing the technology it couldn't even exist. Capacitive screens allow for multitouch, not Apple.
So there's only one way to implement mulit-touch on a capactiive screen? And there 's only one way to unlock a phone?
People still mock Siri even if it is useful...and who mocked multitouch?
Point is Apple didn't invent multitouch and without the other companies actually advancing the technology it couldn't even exist. Capacitive screens allow for multitouch, not Apple.
We had various forms of touch input for years and they all sucked until the first iPhone came out. It's not just about the hardware but the software as well.
Yes but it didn't happen to me...just like I'm sure it didn't happen to Hill60.
When they came a snooping they would have found a locked network there.
What I dislike is their absolute disregard for my privacy.
"For if we are observed in all matters, we are constantly under threat of correction, judgment, criticism, even plagiarism of our own uniqueness. We become children, fettered under watchful eyes, constantly fearful that -- either now or in the uncertain future -- patterns we leave behind will be brought back to implicate us, by whatever authority has now become focused upon our once-private and innocent acts. We lose our individuality, because everything we do is observable and recordable." Bruce Schneier 2006
So google steals something, says "we can't figure out our own way to do it, so apple's way should be the standard because it's the best way to do it". BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Google has done it forever. They scanned all those books without lifting a hand to see what the copyright situation was. They found it bo-ring. To be on a Google database should be an honor!
Google Music is only a place to store your own. The Google TV never spent a second worrying about rights. They just wanted to play the movies wherever they were, no credit. No opportunity to buy or rent.
They are defective and psychopathic about intellectual property, until it's theirs.
Funny thing is, one of the most blatant examples of ripping oft in the mobile phone arena (behind Samsung and their shameless ripping off of Apple) is Apple's shameless ripping off of the Android notification panel.
Um, tell me, did Google patent it? Copyright it? Bet you they didn't.
When they came a snooping they would have found a locked network there.
What I dislike is their absolute disregard for my privacy.
"For if we are observed in all matters, we are constantly under threat of correction, judgment, criticism, even plagiarism of our own uniqueness. We become children, fettered under watchful eyes, constantly fearful that -- either now or in the uncertain future -- patterns we leave behind will be brought back to implicate us, by whatever authority has now become focused upon our once-private and innocent acts. We lose our individuality, because everything we do is observable and recordable." Bruce Schneier 2006
More like IF they came snooping as you have no idea if they did or not. Dislike all you want but using the word hate against something a company just makes people look juvenile.
I actually agree with Google. On that note, I think their search algorithms have become essential for the industry. As much as I've tried switching to Bing or Yahoo, I keep coming back to Google's engine.
Those algorithms should be de facto standards and licensed under FRAND
More like IF they came snooping as you have no idea if they did or not. Dislike all you want but using the word hate against something a company just makes people look juvenile.
They did, the evidence is the streetview picture of my house in Google maps taken prior to them being caught.
Funny thing is, one of the most blatant examples of ripping oft in the mobile phone arena (behind Samsung and their shameless ripping off of Apple) is Apple's shameless ripping off of the Android notification panel.
Why is it when Apple invents something people bring up the silliest examples of prior art like a photo frame, a video mockup of what the future might hold, Star Trek, or some early hominid tablet found in a cave in Southern France, but when it comes to Google prior art all of a sudden has so little meaning that an actual feature (note, not even a product) that was on devices of the same type in the same time frame means nothing?
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by freediverx
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
I suspect you'd be similarly annoyed if someone sprinkled this forum with pro-Leninist references. No need to bring ridiculous, outdated and failed political philosophies into a tech forum.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Ayn Rand's philosophy dovetails nicely into free market capitalism, quite different from Leninism and it perfectly illustrated the point being made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freediverx
You're forgetting patent trolls. They are a clear sign of a failed patent system.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
I don't believe in "patent trolls". I believe in IP as property, and thus the property may be used in any form it's owner wishes.
This isn't new for Google. Think back to Google Books. They felt like it was OK to simply copy every printed work they could find and publish it on the Internet without the copyright holder's permission. After enough authors complained, they asked Congress to change the laws to allow them to do it without the copyright holder's permission.
The morons would be the people who don't understand patents and act like they do. No one said Apple should own multitouch. They said that Apple should own the rights TO THEIR OWN IMPLEMENTATION of multitouch. Google is free to come up with their own, too.
How is something that doesn't exist a sign of a failed patent system?
The problem is that all the people whining about 'patent trolls' don't understand the concept of intellectual property. A patent is property that you can buy, sell, license, use, not use, etc as you wish - just like any other property.
Think of a patent as a factory. If you own a factory, you have the right to leave it empty (unused) if you wish. You can use it yourself to product product. You can rent it out to someone else to produce product. You can wait until the rents increase to a higher level before renting it own. But no one else has the right to take over the factory simply because they don't like what the factory owner is doing with it.
Yes. I have a family to feed and using Windows was necessary. Next question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony
It's not reason at all, how did that personally effect you directly?
According to your logic, one is only "allowed" to hate something if it affects them directly?
Warlords in Africa? No problem, doesn't affect me directly.
Racism? Nah, I'm white.
Child abusers? I'm not a child, what's the big deal.
In my book it's perfectly fine to be disgusted with, or even "hate," people (and organizations) that behave in detestable ways. I'm sure you'll sleep easier now :-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Yes. I have a family to feed and using Windows was necessary. Next question.
That isn't the same thing. No one "forced" you to buy Windows. You decided it fit your needs better and you bought it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Yes. I have a family to feed and using Windows was necessary. Next question.
Get a different job then if using Windows effects your well being so much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax
According to your logic, one is only "allowed" to hate something if it affects them directly?
Warlords in Africa? No problem, doesn't affect me directly.
Racism? Nah, I'm white.
Child abusers? I'm not a child, what's the big deal.
In my book it's perfectly fine to be disgusted with, or even "hate," people (and organizations) that behave in detestable ways. I'm sure you'll sleep easier now :-)
Good point, now show me where Google is a Warlord, Racist or a Child abuser.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
That isn't the same thing. No one "forced" you to buy Windows. You decided it fit your needs better and you bought it.
Exactly but I'm sure he will come back with some more illogical arguments...
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
People still mock Siri even if it is useful...and who mocked multitouch?
Point is Apple didn't invent multitouch and without the other companies actually advancing the technology it couldn't even exist. Capacitive screens allow for multitouch, not Apple.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }We had various forms of touch input for years and they all sucked until the first iPhone came out. It's not just about the hardware but the software as well.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony
Yes but it didn't happen to me...just like I'm sure it didn't happen to Hill60.
When they came a snooping they would have found a locked network there.
What I dislike is their absolute disregard for my privacy.
"For if we are observed in all matters, we are constantly under threat of correction, judgment, criticism, even plagiarism of our own uniqueness. We become children, fettered under watchful eyes, constantly fearful that -- either now or in the uncertain future -- patterns we leave behind will be brought back to implicate us, by whatever authority has now become focused upon our once-private and innocent acts. We lose our individuality, because everything we do is observable and recordable." Bruce Schneier 2006
So google steals something, says "we can't figure out our own way to do it, so apple's way should be the standard because it's the best way to do it". BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Google has done it forever. They scanned all those books without lifting a hand to see what the copyright situation was. They found it bo-ring. To be on a Google database should be an honor!
Google Music is only a place to store your own. The Google TV never spent a second worrying about rights. They just wanted to play the movies wherever they were, no credit. No opportunity to buy or rent.
They are defective and psychopathic about intellectual property, until it's theirs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
Funny thing is, one of the most blatant examples of ripping oft in the mobile phone arena (behind Samsung and their shameless ripping off of Apple) is Apple's shameless ripping off of the Android notification panel.
Um, tell me, did Google patent it? Copyright it? Bet you they didn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
When they came a snooping they would have found a locked network there.
What I dislike is their absolute disregard for my privacy.
"For if we are observed in all matters, we are constantly under threat of correction, judgment, criticism, even plagiarism of our own uniqueness. We become children, fettered under watchful eyes, constantly fearful that -- either now or in the uncertain future -- patterns we leave behind will be brought back to implicate us, by whatever authority has now become focused upon our once-private and innocent acts. We lose our individuality, because everything we do is observable and recordable." Bruce Schneier 2006
More like IF they came snooping as you have no idea if they did or not. Dislike all you want but using the word hate against something a company just makes people look juvenile.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony
More like IF they came snooping as you have no idea if they did or not. Dislike all you want but using the word hate against something a company just makes people look juvenile.
They did, the evidence is the streetview picture of my house in Google maps taken prior to them being caught.
Why is it when Apple invents something people bring up the silliest examples of prior art like a photo frame, a video mockup of what the future might hold, Star Trek, or some early hominid tablet found in a cave in Southern France, but when it comes to Google prior art all of a sudden has so little meaning that an actual feature (note, not even a product) that was on devices of the same type in the same time frame means nothing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
They did, the evidence is the streetview picture of my house in Google maps.
Ahh so you know for a certainty that Google was trying to get access to your personal wireless network when the picture of your house was taken?