After reading all the comments, I am thoroughly convinced that you Apple fanboys are delusional. Anyone who loves Apple cannot seriously call Google or anyone else a patent troll. Selective memory is a common trait of you guys. I love Google but not to the point of denying truth and fact. Apple has innovated a lot of technology, but they have not created anything. Apple has set a very high standard with their products, some of which I love. In fact I am typing this on my Macbook. More sales does not equal better. The truth about Apple is they are victims of their own success. There hasn't been any truly groundbreaking Apple innovation in some time. Yet iSheep continue to buy the same thing year in and year out. I laughed when the 4S was released. Not because I was jealous or I was hating on Apple. I laughed because I knew millions of people owning the 4 would buy the 4S happily while realizing it's the same phone. I stepped over the fence just to see if there was a least one of you that got it. I hoped that one of you iSheep would say "Apple asked for it." Maybe there is no hope for you. You can continue to lie to yourselves now.
I have to fully admit that folks like you are the reason I read posts. I'm fascinated by the sociological event that has arisen in both smart phones and tablets. I really do read this in my spare time as enjoyment!
I do understand you will probably never read my post. However I'd like to strike a few flaws in your generalized manifesto.
First, if your going to include everyone (supposedly the pretense of iSheep) I don't want to be mentioned as a fanBOY. That's awful rude of you!
Second, not everyone has a 'selective' memory nor are even able to select what they remember at all. To preclude that everyone reading or posting on this forum can accomplish such a feat is utterly disturbing!
While it is completely true that Apple MAY become a victim of its success, I see no evidence that such a phenomena is occurring at the present moment or will happen anytime within the near future (baring the sales staffing issue).
Also, I did try to analyze your post so I could join in the fun on the new game of guessing if you were banned. I used both your sentence structure and vocabulary. I also thought about previous posted topics from forum members. (unfortuneately only those that I have read) This method is evidently fallible because the result I came up with is a very well known poster on this site. I should mention that I did just recently learn that you can have more than one name on here. I'll wait for Tallest's research on this before I point a finger.... It would be cool if I'm right!
Apple has innovated a lot of technology, but they have not created anything.
This is called "Directed Dichotomy" in certain circles so to speak. I see this often and hear it even more often in verbal speech (obviously). If you are going to incline that people posting here are ignorant (underlining meaning of your post), perhaps you shouldn't include contrary items in your post. That was just one item!
Would it behoove you to just post as yourself, or are you in the constant "tug-of-war" where you post completely contradictory to your ordinary posts? Like a fireman who lights fires so he (or she) can go put them out...
This is fascinating! I'm learning a lot!
Edit: spelling error. My friends and I call it spelling corruption...
If you're going to troll, at least do it effectively.
Moto's products are lousy and so is their service. Derivative, undifferentiated junk (unless "fugly" counts as differentiation.) There's a *reason* they needed a buyout. They were tanking. But I'm sure that's what Sanjay Jha told the board: "B-b-but we invented the cellphone like 30 years ago! Impossible" Uh-huh.
Those who fail to re-invent their business end up as buyout-bait with nothing left but an old trove of patents, most of which they try to wield around (as in: abuse) for FRAND licensing dollars. Like an old hooker way past her sell-by date.
Google didn't buy them for the 27 flavours of crap they churn out, or cable boxes (LOL) or toasters. Or whatever else that is no longer relevant. Google bought them for one reason only: PATENTS. $12.5 billion to purchase patents to be wielded against competitors at a later date (not very successfully), while letting Moto go to complete shit. Because 1) Google doesn't really have any meaningful patents of their own, and they *knew* at some point they'd have to answer for their theft, and 2) because they're a bottom-feeding ad company that isn't above remedying 1 by behaving like 2.
Google turned Motorola a dying company into a Zombie Patent Troll!
Google -> Do know evil!
How was moto a dying company? Mobility makes not only some of the most popular phones, but pretty much every cable set top box and modem used by some of the largest MSOs in the world...they have a virtual printing press in that business, ScientificAtlanta is the only other game in town..
How was moto a dying company? Mobility makes not only some of the most popular phones, but pretty much every cable set top box and modem used by some of the largest MSOs in the world...they have a virtual printing press in that business, ScientificAtlanta is the only other game in town..
When was the last time they used black ink in their balance sheet?
It's time Apple gets a taste of their own medicine. How dare they try to block Samsung products and stop competition so they can stop innovating and start shoving the same old crap down our throat. The iPhone hasn't innovated anything since the iPhone 1.
Samsung doesn't do much in the way of innovating with cell phones and tablets. They just copy. They've been doing that for years. They tried to copy the RIM and Palm phones with their other phones. Samsung also tried to copy Apple's Newton product, which was the first handheld pen PDA.
My question is why didn't Moto try to sue Apple long before Google bought the company. It's not like Moto didn't know Apple has been selling smartphones.
Is there a distinction between cell phones and smartphone? Yeah, one is more of a computing device and a cell phone, rather than just a cell phone with a couple of specific apps loaded on it. Apple doesn't make a cell phone with just a couple of specific apps loaded on it. You can add more apps that perform more functions to that of a computer. So, there might be a way around it.
The other thing is patent infringements is a difficult thing to deal with. NO company like having to sue another. Apple has TRIED to deal with Samsung for MANY YEARS on this.
In the end, it wouldn't surprise me if Samsung ultimately had to pay Apple over $2 Billion. See the problem is that some patents aren't justifyable patents, but many are. The US Copyright Office, obviously can't go through every patent submitted to check the validity of the patent in the first place. They just process the paperwork in hopes that it was checked PRIOR to be submitted and the patent attorneys filled out the paperwork properly. From my limited knowledge of patent law, since I'm not an attorney. If a product is sold on the market with a certain functionality, without patent paperwork submitted, then the patent is or at least SHOULD BE invalidated.
I personally don't know how many of these patents Moto has the are actually patentable since email, email notification, video players have been around before Cell phones and I'm sure Moto didn't come up with the first email system with notification as well as video players, etc. But since Apple just seem fit to just settle, Google wants to go to court on it.
Obviously, some of things that are going on have a personal tone to it. Apple was developing THEIR unique approach to a smartphone by using their OWN operating system, with a touchscreen sans physical keyboard, as well as having the look and feel of an APPLE product rather than trying to LOOK like a PALM phone, or a RIMM phone. Eric Schmidt, Google's CEO at the time, was on Apple's Board and Apple has been doing business with Samsung on component supplier and Apple thought that it was improper for Google and Samsung to work together on whatever level they were, to basically through the components Apple didn't buy, slap it together and do a quick and dirty almost blatant copy of an iPhone and iPad, almost down the carton. Maybe Apple used some of Samsung patents knowingly or many times unknowingly.
Some times they do something and they don't have time to research every single patent before they actually start using it. Yeah, Apple had access to the products that have been shipped, but anything that wasn't shipped, they don't have access unless Apple gets physical possession of something to rip apart and get access to it, especially since they are not patents on the outside, but more internal workings.
Either way, we can have out own opinions on everything, and ultimately what is going to happen is up to the courts and people involved, not us. We all have our own biases that produce our own opinions, so right, wrong, indifferent, the ugliness of patents will continue on and it is up to the courts and each party to deal with, not us.
I just think that Apple could potentially do things to prevent Google's Android OS from doing things that gives them equal footing. Apple has iBooks and PodCasts, if Apple wants to protect that, they MIGHT be able go after the app developers and prevent the capability of being able to download and/or view/listen to iBooks and Podcasts on Android devices.
That would be my next move if I were Apple. Apple pretty much owns the Podcast market and Google just dropped their Podcasting software because no one wants to have their content on Google's eco-system as they prefer to have it on Apple's. Apple developed the iBook standard and they might be able to control what products can have readers for these.
After reading all the comments, I am thoroughly convinced that you Apple fanboys are delusional. Anyone who loves Apple cannot seriously call Google or anyone else a patent troll. Selective memory is a common trait of you guys. I love Google but not to the point of denying truth and fact. Apple has innovated a lot of technology, but they have not created anything. Apple has set a very high standard with their products, some of which I love. In fact I am typing this on my Macbook. More sales does not equal better. The truth about Apple is they are victims of their own success. There hasn't been any truly groundbreaking Apple innovation in some time. Yet iSheep continue to buy the same thing year in and year out. I laughed when the 4S was released. Not because I was jealous or I was hating on Apple. I laughed because I knew millions of people owning the 4 would buy the 4S happily while realizing it's the same phone. I stepped over the fence just to see if there was a least one of you that got it. I hoped that one of you iSheep would say "Apple asked for it." Maybe there is no hope for you. You can continue to lie to yourselves now.
Dude using the word iSheep only shows that you yourself are a fanboy or as you refer to it a sheep. You have fallen victim to the marketing of the dark side. So you laugh with people buying the 4s after selling off their iPhone 4 but a that time they had the most powerful smartphone with what is today still the best mobile OS?! Look at the reviews from the dark side and you will see that all new high end android smartphones are still being measured in how they stack up to the iPhone 4S. And even when they come whit their benchmarking tools you'll notice that the one year old iPhone isn't lacking behind. So why do you laugh with people buying the newest and fastest phone? Isn't that what they do on the dark side? I myself bought a 3G and after that a 4, I didn't buy the S models but I noticed people that jumped the fence to the dark side make stupid assumptions like you do claiming "iSheep buy every time over and over again" Guess what, they all traded in their Galaxy S2 for the S3. The S3 has no innovation inside or outside. It might be more on par with the 4S but a bigger screen isn't innovation and adding software that was already on the iPhone isn't as well. My iPhone 4 still rocks, never felt the need to upgrade to a 4S but my friends who have turned to the dark side have upgraded their phones because they had to. So don't come laughing here telling us about iSheep, turn to your fellow sith and tell them they don't need to buy an S3 and get laughed and spit at with spec sheets and so called innovations that are just rip-offs to catch up with Apple.
I don't like the lawsuits going around. If this forces Apple to cross-license its patents, then I applaud Google for trying to end the war once and for all.
"Don't be evil." shouldn't mean being a pushover. Hopefully, this will end the patent fights and get them back into the labs working on products.
Of course, you're not the one who's got billions of dollars at stake + intellectual property. You don't have shareholders to answer to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
If this forces Apple to cross-license its patents, then I applaud Google for trying to end the war once and for all.
As in, compel someone to share their personal property (that hasn't been categorized under FRAND)??
Sure, you could do that. If you're some sort of fascist nutbar.
Licensing what's yours to others is a personal decision, for which the responsibility rests with the OWNER of that property, and with anyone else who has a stake in it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
Hopefully, this will end the patent fights and get them back into the labs working on products.
Apple been involved in IP litigation since the early days of the company.
Do you actually think they're *not* working on products? Where do those new iPhones, Macs, iPads, Mountain Lion, iCloud and the like come from? Do they just fall out of the sky?
In fact, Apple have been the only ones in consumer tech who have actually done anything meaningful for the past 5 years, if not the past decade. The industry follows Apple's lead. They've revolutionized the way you and I use and think about tech. Here's the kicker: it involved PRODUCTS.
Apple been involved in IP litigation since the early days of the company.
Do you actually think they're *not* working on products? Where do those new iPhones, Macs, iPads, Mountain Lion, iCloud and the like come from? Do they just fall out of the sky?
In fact, Apple have been the only ones in consumer tech who have actually done anything meaningful for the past 5 years, if not the past decade. The industry follows Apple's lead. They've revolutionized the way you and I use and think about tech. Here's the kicker: it involved PRODUCTS.
I think the "Apple needs to stop the litigation and get back to innovating" arguments shed a lot of insight into the minds of the Apple haters.
Lawsuits are generally driven by marketing people. "We're finding it harder to compete because someone stole our technology and our advantages are reduced". So lawsuits tend to involve people in marketing type functions.
Innovation, of course, generally involves dedicated designers and inventors who are not in the marketing department, but rather in the R&D group or a dedicated skunk works.
By saying "Apple needs to stop the litigation and get back to innovating", the iHaters are essentially saying that their view of the world is that it's the marketing people who are doing the product development. That is, they are agreeing with the Samsung model where 'innovation' means 'copying everything you possibly can from the competition'. IOW, by acting as if litigation is detracting from Apple's R&D efforts, they are proving that they don't have any idea what real innovation is or where it comes from.
Samsung doesn't do much in the way of innovating with cell phones and tablets. They just copy. They've been doing that for years. They tried to copy the RIM and Palm phones with their other phones. Samsung also tried to copy Apple's Newton product, which was the first handheld pen PDA.
My question is why didn't Moto try to sue Apple long before Google bought the company. It's not like Moto didn't know Apple has been selling smartphones.
Is there a distinction between cell phones and smartphone? Yeah, one is more of a computing device and a cell phone, rather than just a cell phone with a couple of specific apps loaded on it. Apple doesn't make a cell phone with just a couple of specific apps loaded on it. You can add more apps that perform more functions to that of a computer. So, there might be a way around it.
The other thing is patent infringements is a difficult thing to deal with. NO company like having to sue another. Apple has TRIED to deal with Samsung for MANY YEARS on this.
In the end, it wouldn't surprise me if Samsung ultimately had to pay Apple over $2 Billion. See the problem is that some patents aren't justifyable patents, but many are. The US Copyright Office, obviously can't go through every patent submitted to check the validity of the patent in the first place. They just process the paperwork in hopes that it was checked PRIOR to be submitted and the patent attorneys filled out the paperwork properly. From my limited knowledge of patent law, since I'm not an attorney. If a product is sold on the market with a certain functionality, without patent paperwork submitted, then the patent is or at least SHOULD BE invalidated.
I personally don't know how many of these patents Moto has the are actually patentable since email, email notification, video players have been around before Cell phones and I'm sure Moto didn't come up with the first email system with notification as well as video players, etc. But since Apple just seem fit to just settle, Google wants to go to court on it.
Obviously, some of things that are going on have a personal tone to it. Apple was developing THEIR unique approach to a smartphone by using their OWN operating system, with a touchscreen sans physical keyboard, as well as having the look and feel of an APPLE product rather than trying to LOOK like a PALM phone, or a RIMM phone. Eric Schmidt, Google's CEO at the time, was on Apple's Board and Apple has been doing business with Samsung on component supplier and Apple thought that it was improper for Google and Samsung to work together on whatever level they were, to basically through the components Apple didn't buy, slap it together and do a quick and dirty almost blatant copy of an iPhone and iPad, almost down the carton. Maybe Apple used some of Samsung patents knowingly or many times unknowingly.
Some times they do something and they don't have time to research every single patent before they actually start using it. Yeah, Apple had access to the products that have been shipped, but anything that wasn't shipped, they don't have access unless Apple gets physical possession of something to rip apart and get access to it, especially since they are not patents on the outside, but more internal workings.
Either way, we can have out own opinions on everything, and ultimately what is going to happen is up to the courts and people involved, not us. We all have our own biases that produce our own opinions, so right, wrong, indifferent, the ugliness of patents will continue on and it is up to the courts and each party to deal with, not us.
I just think that Apple could potentially do things to prevent Google's Android OS from doing things that gives them equal footing. Apple has iBooks and PodCasts, if Apple wants to protect that, they MIGHT be able go after the app developers and prevent the capability of being able to download and/or view/listen to iBooks and Podcasts on Android devices.
That would be my next move if I were Apple. Apple pretty much owns the Podcast market and Google just dropped their Podcasting software because no one wants to have their content on Google's eco-system as they prefer to have it on Apple's. Apple developed the iBook standard and they might be able to control what products can have readers for these.
Moto and Apple have been suing each other since 2010. way before Google had thoughts of buying them
For what patents? Were those other lawsuits resolved? I didn't read about those other lawsuits for whatever reason. I am just reading about this particular one.
Moto and Apple have been suing each other since 2010 idiot. way before Google had thoughts of buying them
But what were the OTHER lawsuits about compared to THIS lawsuit? I don't follow every single lawsuit
So, please describe the OTHER lawsuits, their outcomes and THIS lawsuit, so you can enlighten me.
From what I have read about THIS lawsuit. I think it is a CHICKEN$HIT lawsuit. But that is based on the information i have read. I think having an email, video player, notification are BS lawsuits. Now, if they are done a particular way that is UNIQUE and someone is copying the same way then I can see a problem. But just having email on a cell phone, whereas Apple has a SMARTPHONE seems to me like two different products.
But what were the OTHER lawsuits about compared to THIS lawsuit? I don't follow every single lawsuit
So, please describe the OTHER lawsuits, their outcomes and THIS lawsuit, so you can enlighten me.
From what I have read about THIS lawsuit. I think it is a CHICKEN$HIT lawsuit. But that is based on the information i have read. I think having an email, video player, notification are BS lawsuits. Now, if they are done a particular way that is UNIQUE and someone is copying the same way then I can see a problem. But just having email on a cell phone, whereas Apple has a SMARTPHONE seems to me like two different products.
You think they're chickenshit suits because you don't understand the issues.
Microsoft doesn't have a patent on email on a phone. That's not how patents work. Rather, they have a patent on specific implementations of technology involved and they believe Apple has infringed their patents.
Until we know what patents are involved and the details of the patents, it's impossible to say how strong their case might be. But to immediately discard it because you think it's about email on a phone is ridiculous.
Motorola's timing is interesting.
E-mail notifications? They could have brought all this up years ago.
I think this the same patent that Moto won in a European court last year which forced Apple to create some email workaround for MobileMe in Europe. I don't remember the exact details but yes they did bring this one up a while ago.
Comments
I have to fully admit that folks like you are the reason I read posts. I'm fascinated by the sociological event that has arisen in both smart phones and tablets. I really do read this in my spare time as enjoyment!
I do understand you will probably never read my post. However I'd like to strike a few flaws in your generalized manifesto.
First, if your going to include everyone (supposedly the pretense of iSheep) I don't want to be mentioned as a fanBOY. That's awful rude of you!
Second, not everyone has a 'selective' memory nor are even able to select what they remember at all. To preclude that everyone reading or posting on this forum can accomplish such a feat is utterly disturbing!
While it is completely true that Apple MAY become a victim of its success, I see no evidence that such a phenomena is occurring at the present moment or will happen anytime within the near future (baring the sales staffing issue).
Also, I did try to analyze your post so I could join in the fun on the new game of guessing if you were banned. I used both your sentence structure and vocabulary. I also thought about previous posted topics from forum members. (unfortuneately only those that I have read) This method is evidently fallible because the result I came up with is a very well known poster on this site. I should mention that I did just recently learn that you can have more than one name on here. I'll wait for Tallest's research on this before I point a finger.... It would be cool if I'm right!
This is called "Directed Dichotomy" in certain circles so to speak. I see this often and hear it even more often in verbal speech (obviously). If you are going to incline that people posting here are ignorant (underlining meaning of your post), perhaps you shouldn't include contrary items in your post. That was just one item!
Would it behoove you to just post as yourself, or are you in the constant "tug-of-war" where you post completely contradictory to your ordinary posts? Like a fireman who lights fires so he (or she) can go put them out...
This is fascinating! I'm learning a lot!
Edit: spelling error. My friends and I call it spelling corruption...
Nicely put into words.
J.
Google turned Motorola a dying company into a Zombie Patent Troll!
Google -> Do know evil!
This is great! maybe if we have enough of this bullshit, we can get some much needed reform at the USPTO..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Torcato
Google turned Motorola a dying company into a Zombie Patent Troll!
Google -> Do know evil!
How was moto a dying company? Mobility makes not only some of the most popular phones, but pretty much every cable set top box and modem used by some of the largest MSOs in the world...they have a virtual printing press in that business, ScientificAtlanta is the only other game in town..
When was the last time they used black ink in their balance sheet?
The last few years have been a sea of red.
E-mail notifications? They could have brought all this up years ago.
Do you not follow tech news?
Now I'll agree Google has at the least signed off on a suit against a competitor. Took 'em long enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ewan
It's time Apple gets a taste of their own medicine. How dare they try to block Samsung products and stop competition so they can stop innovating and start shoving the same old crap down our throat. The iPhone hasn't innovated anything since the iPhone 1.
Samsung doesn't do much in the way of innovating with cell phones and tablets. They just copy. They've been doing that for years. They tried to copy the RIM and Palm phones with their other phones. Samsung also tried to copy Apple's Newton product, which was the first handheld pen PDA.
My question is why didn't Moto try to sue Apple long before Google bought the company. It's not like Moto didn't know Apple has been selling smartphones.
Is there a distinction between cell phones and smartphone? Yeah, one is more of a computing device and a cell phone, rather than just a cell phone with a couple of specific apps loaded on it. Apple doesn't make a cell phone with just a couple of specific apps loaded on it. You can add more apps that perform more functions to that of a computer. So, there might be a way around it.
The other thing is patent infringements is a difficult thing to deal with. NO company like having to sue another. Apple has TRIED to deal with Samsung for MANY YEARS on this.
In the end, it wouldn't surprise me if Samsung ultimately had to pay Apple over $2 Billion. See the problem is that some patents aren't justifyable patents, but many are. The US Copyright Office, obviously can't go through every patent submitted to check the validity of the patent in the first place. They just process the paperwork in hopes that it was checked PRIOR to be submitted and the patent attorneys filled out the paperwork properly. From my limited knowledge of patent law, since I'm not an attorney. If a product is sold on the market with a certain functionality, without patent paperwork submitted, then the patent is or at least SHOULD BE invalidated.
I personally don't know how many of these patents Moto has the are actually patentable since email, email notification, video players have been around before Cell phones and I'm sure Moto didn't come up with the first email system with notification as well as video players, etc. But since Apple just seem fit to just settle, Google wants to go to court on it.
Obviously, some of things that are going on have a personal tone to it. Apple was developing THEIR unique approach to a smartphone by using their OWN operating system, with a touchscreen sans physical keyboard, as well as having the look and feel of an APPLE product rather than trying to LOOK like a PALM phone, or a RIMM phone. Eric Schmidt, Google's CEO at the time, was on Apple's Board and Apple has been doing business with Samsung on component supplier and Apple thought that it was improper for Google and Samsung to work together on whatever level they were, to basically through the components Apple didn't buy, slap it together and do a quick and dirty almost blatant copy of an iPhone and iPad, almost down the carton. Maybe Apple used some of Samsung patents knowingly or many times unknowingly.
Some times they do something and they don't have time to research every single patent before they actually start using it. Yeah, Apple had access to the products that have been shipped, but anything that wasn't shipped, they don't have access unless Apple gets physical possession of something to rip apart and get access to it, especially since they are not patents on the outside, but more internal workings.
Either way, we can have out own opinions on everything, and ultimately what is going to happen is up to the courts and people involved, not us. We all have our own biases that produce our own opinions, so right, wrong, indifferent, the ugliness of patents will continue on and it is up to the courts and each party to deal with, not us.
I just think that Apple could potentially do things to prevent Google's Android OS from doing things that gives them equal footing. Apple has iBooks and PodCasts, if Apple wants to protect that, they MIGHT be able go after the app developers and prevent the capability of being able to download and/or view/listen to iBooks and Podcasts on Android devices.
That would be my next move if I were Apple. Apple pretty much owns the Podcast market and Google just dropped their Podcasting software because no one wants to have their content on Google's eco-system as they prefer to have it on Apple's. Apple developed the iBook standard and they might be able to control what products can have readers for these.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fwgrizzwald
After reading all the comments, I am thoroughly convinced that you Apple fanboys are delusional. Anyone who loves Apple cannot seriously call Google or anyone else a patent troll. Selective memory is a common trait of you guys. I love Google but not to the point of denying truth and fact. Apple has innovated a lot of technology, but they have not created anything. Apple has set a very high standard with their products, some of which I love. In fact I am typing this on my Macbook. More sales does not equal better. The truth about Apple is they are victims of their own success. There hasn't been any truly groundbreaking Apple innovation in some time. Yet iSheep continue to buy the same thing year in and year out. I laughed when the 4S was released. Not because I was jealous or I was hating on Apple. I laughed because I knew millions of people owning the 4 would buy the 4S happily while realizing it's the same phone. I stepped over the fence just to see if there was a least one of you that got it. I hoped that one of you iSheep would say "Apple asked for it." Maybe there is no hope for you. You can continue to lie to yourselves now.
Dude using the word iSheep only shows that you yourself are a fanboy or as you refer to it a sheep. You have fallen victim to the marketing of the dark side. So you laugh with people buying the 4s after selling off their iPhone 4 but a that time they had the most powerful smartphone with what is today still the best mobile OS?! Look at the reviews from the dark side and you will see that all new high end android smartphones are still being measured in how they stack up to the iPhone 4S. And even when they come whit their benchmarking tools you'll notice that the one year old iPhone isn't lacking behind. So why do you laugh with people buying the newest and fastest phone? Isn't that what they do on the dark side? I myself bought a 3G and after that a 4, I didn't buy the S models but I noticed people that jumped the fence to the dark side make stupid assumptions like you do claiming "iSheep buy every time over and over again" Guess what, they all traded in their Galaxy S2 for the S3. The S3 has no innovation inside or outside. It might be more on par with the 4S but a bigger screen isn't innovation and adding software that was already on the iPhone isn't as well. My iPhone 4 still rocks, never felt the need to upgrade to a 4S but my friends who have turned to the dark side have upgraded their phones because they had to. So don't come laughing here telling us about iSheep, turn to your fellow sith and tell them they don't need to buy an S3 and get laughed and spit at with spec sheets and so called innovations that are just rip-offs to catch up with Apple.
I don't like the lawsuits going around. If this forces Apple to cross-license its patents, then I applaud Google for trying to end the war once and for all.
"Don't be evil." shouldn't mean being a pushover. Hopefully, this will end the patent fights and get them back into the labs working on products.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
I don't like the lawsuits going around.
Why? They've got nothing to do with you.
Of course, you're not the one who's got billions of dollars at stake + intellectual property. You don't have shareholders to answer to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
If this forces Apple to cross-license its patents, then I applaud Google for trying to end the war once and for all.
As in, compel someone to share their personal property (that hasn't been categorized under FRAND)??
Sure, you could do that. If you're some sort of fascist nutbar.
Licensing what's yours to others is a personal decision, for which the responsibility rests with the OWNER of that property, and with anyone else who has a stake in it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
Hopefully, this will end the patent fights and get them back into the labs working on products.
Apple been involved in IP litigation since the early days of the company.
Do you actually think they're *not* working on products? Where do those new iPhones, Macs, iPads, Mountain Lion, iCloud and the like come from? Do they just fall out of the sky?
In fact, Apple have been the only ones in consumer tech who have actually done anything meaningful for the past 5 years, if not the past decade. The industry follows Apple's lead. They've revolutionized the way you and I use and think about tech. Here's the kicker: it involved PRODUCTS.
I think the "Apple needs to stop the litigation and get back to innovating" arguments shed a lot of insight into the minds of the Apple haters.
Lawsuits are generally driven by marketing people. "We're finding it harder to compete because someone stole our technology and our advantages are reduced". So lawsuits tend to involve people in marketing type functions.
Innovation, of course, generally involves dedicated designers and inventors who are not in the marketing department, but rather in the R&D group or a dedicated skunk works.
By saying "Apple needs to stop the litigation and get back to innovating", the iHaters are essentially saying that their view of the world is that it's the marketing people who are doing the product development. That is, they are agreeing with the Samsung model where 'innovation' means 'copying everything you possibly can from the competition'. IOW, by acting as if litigation is detracting from Apple's R&D efforts, they are proving that they don't have any idea what real innovation is or where it comes from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
Samsung doesn't do much in the way of innovating with cell phones and tablets. They just copy. They've been doing that for years. They tried to copy the RIM and Palm phones with their other phones. Samsung also tried to copy Apple's Newton product, which was the first handheld pen PDA.
My question is why didn't Moto try to sue Apple long before Google bought the company. It's not like Moto didn't know Apple has been selling smartphones.
Is there a distinction between cell phones and smartphone? Yeah, one is more of a computing device and a cell phone, rather than just a cell phone with a couple of specific apps loaded on it. Apple doesn't make a cell phone with just a couple of specific apps loaded on it. You can add more apps that perform more functions to that of a computer. So, there might be a way around it.
The other thing is patent infringements is a difficult thing to deal with. NO company like having to sue another. Apple has TRIED to deal with Samsung for MANY YEARS on this.
In the end, it wouldn't surprise me if Samsung ultimately had to pay Apple over $2 Billion. See the problem is that some patents aren't justifyable patents, but many are. The US Copyright Office, obviously can't go through every patent submitted to check the validity of the patent in the first place. They just process the paperwork in hopes that it was checked PRIOR to be submitted and the patent attorneys filled out the paperwork properly. From my limited knowledge of patent law, since I'm not an attorney. If a product is sold on the market with a certain functionality, without patent paperwork submitted, then the patent is or at least SHOULD BE invalidated.
I personally don't know how many of these patents Moto has the are actually patentable since email, email notification, video players have been around before Cell phones and I'm sure Moto didn't come up with the first email system with notification as well as video players, etc. But since Apple just seem fit to just settle, Google wants to go to court on it.
Obviously, some of things that are going on have a personal tone to it. Apple was developing THEIR unique approach to a smartphone by using their OWN operating system, with a touchscreen sans physical keyboard, as well as having the look and feel of an APPLE product rather than trying to LOOK like a PALM phone, or a RIMM phone. Eric Schmidt, Google's CEO at the time, was on Apple's Board and Apple has been doing business with Samsung on component supplier and Apple thought that it was improper for Google and Samsung to work together on whatever level they were, to basically through the components Apple didn't buy, slap it together and do a quick and dirty almost blatant copy of an iPhone and iPad, almost down the carton. Maybe Apple used some of Samsung patents knowingly or many times unknowingly.
Some times they do something and they don't have time to research every single patent before they actually start using it. Yeah, Apple had access to the products that have been shipped, but anything that wasn't shipped, they don't have access unless Apple gets physical possession of something to rip apart and get access to it, especially since they are not patents on the outside, but more internal workings.
Either way, we can have out own opinions on everything, and ultimately what is going to happen is up to the courts and people involved, not us. We all have our own biases that produce our own opinions, so right, wrong, indifferent, the ugliness of patents will continue on and it is up to the courts and each party to deal with, not us.
I just think that Apple could potentially do things to prevent Google's Android OS from doing things that gives them equal footing. Apple has iBooks and PodCasts, if Apple wants to protect that, they MIGHT be able go after the app developers and prevent the capability of being able to download and/or view/listen to iBooks and Podcasts on Android devices.
That would be my next move if I were Apple. Apple pretty much owns the Podcast market and Google just dropped their Podcasting software because no one wants to have their content on Google's eco-system as they prefer to have it on Apple's. Apple developed the iBook standard and they might be able to control what products can have readers for these.
Moto and Apple have been suing each other since 2010. way before Google had thoughts of buying them
For what patents? Were those other lawsuits resolved? I didn't read about those other lawsuits for whatever reason. I am just reading about this particular one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techstalker
Moto and Apple have been suing each other since 2010 idiot. way before Google had thoughts of buying them
But what were the OTHER lawsuits about compared to THIS lawsuit? I don't follow every single lawsuit
So, please describe the OTHER lawsuits, their outcomes and THIS lawsuit, so you can enlighten me.
From what I have read about THIS lawsuit. I think it is a CHICKEN$HIT lawsuit. But that is based on the information i have read. I think having an email, video player, notification are BS lawsuits. Now, if they are done a particular way that is UNIQUE and someone is copying the same way then I can see a problem. But just having email on a cell phone, whereas Apple has a SMARTPHONE seems to me like two different products.
You think they're chickenshit suits because you don't understand the issues.
Microsoft doesn't have a patent on email on a phone. That's not how patents work. Rather, they have a patent on specific implementations of technology involved and they believe Apple has infringed their patents.
Until we know what patents are involved and the details of the patents, it's impossible to say how strong their case might be. But to immediately discard it because you think it's about email on a phone is ridiculous.
I think this the same patent that Moto won in a European court last year which forced Apple to create some email workaround for MobileMe in Europe. I don't remember the exact details but yes they did bring this one up a while ago.