i have been waiting for a big improvement of the apple keyboard for years that i had to go logitech bluetooth. i mean i would love to the the minimalistic design incorporating what we all want.
the fusion keyboard seems an interesting direction.
i want to replace my logitech with ive's design incorporated. lets bring wireless charging with a years worth of battery life. lets see it thinness. lets see the long requested backlit keyboard for the desktop users. force touch would be so handy all over with fluid spills.
i remember going to the computer lab with the old apple floppy discs and my teacher said no drinks allowed here. and doing away with those silicone colorfull and sticky keyboard covers will be so garbage. id rather it also fight fingerprints with the latest oleophobic coating to top it off.
ideas are worthless w/o implementation details. for instance: "flying car" is a great idea, but you can't patent that. you can patent a propulsion system designed for your flying car, however.
Have you ever posted a single thing about Apple that isn't soaked in bile?
I'm tired of your petulant whining. Blocked with a vengeance.
while I'm inclined to agree, i must agree that the dictionary on iOS is still pretty weak. main complains -- it doesnt recognize enough misspellings, it sometimes refuses to change even known misspellings, and no way to add words to a custom dictionary (how many times must i tap "ducking" and change it to my desired word?!)
Hardly the same. This patent describes they discern the left hand from the right. Allowing for a new way of using a touch as input. And the physical keys can be pressed to two levels. I don;t see any of that in that YT video. Actually, the person didn't seem to think much of the unintuitive way it works. He want to swipe in more than one app, like scrolling through photos. That didn't work.
Besides, I'd think Apple would investigate current patents before applying in order to avoid a lawsuit.
That was just the first iteration of the keyboards ability's, the newest update introduced a bunch of new features like being able to zoom in and out of picture or a website and has greatly improved the cursor movemenmt when editing a documemt, since it's just software the possibilities are endless. The hardware part was done right the first time, touch enabled which means you no longer have to use the touchscreen to select things or move the cursor around, fantastic. After a few a more updates like the ones I listed there really won't be much of a difference, besides the Passport exists now and we really don't know when and what exactly the feature set will be in this new Apple keyboard. Like I said before though, I'm all in, I really like using my Passports keyboard because of it's touch features so I can only imagine that I will be equally impressed with Apples iteration.
Sony had that keyboard in 2008, it was a PS3 addon.
Cool, I never used a Sony PS3 but that's pretty neat. I wasn't trying to say the Passport was first or anything, people here are to hung up on that. No, I was simply saying that I'm using this kind of technology now and love it.
ideas are worthless w/o implementation details. for instance: "flying car" is a great idea, but you can't patent that. you can patent a propulsion system designed for your flying car, however.
People often fail to realize this. While I do think Samsung should have been punished, I still think Apple was not the one to be wronged. What Samsung copied is not an implementation detail (or prove that they stole code or blueprints...). They copied a look, therefore damaging the general public, making the layman incorrectly believe that their Galaxy phones were iPhones (seen Galaxy phones sold as "a cheaper iPhone" at phone dealerships...), or at best an acceptable equivalent with better value for the money... Which it is not.)
What I mean is, I believe Samsung imitated design and copied ideas: they therefore swindled people by abusing their lack of understanding of tech. The DoJ could have gone after them for that if they had thought it worth it. Apparently they didn't.
The part where Apple gets to sue based on patents describing the looks of their product is the part where patents (technical details) and brand recognition ( selling Catrier watches or Hemres scarves or Nicke shoes, or otherwise named stuff but visually identical) get confused together, and that is messy and leads to weird legal situations like the ones we witnessed over the last few years.
The system was designed wisely. Complexity in got via courts and overly broad patents only makes one type of people win. Lawyers.
Comments
the fusion keyboard seems an interesting direction.
i want to replace my logitech with ive's design incorporated. lets bring wireless charging with a years worth of battery life. lets see it thinness. lets see the long requested backlit keyboard for the desktop users. force touch would be so handy all over with fluid spills.
i remember going to the computer lab with the old apple floppy discs and my teacher said no drinks allowed here. and doing away with those silicone colorfull and sticky keyboard covers will be so garbage. id rather it also fight fingerprints with the latest oleophobic coating to top it off.
i cant wait really!!
she tries so hard, doesnt she.
ideas are worthless w/o implementation details. for instance: "flying car" is a great idea, but you can't patent that. you can patent a propulsion system designed for your flying car, however.
while I'm inclined to agree, i must agree that the dictionary on iOS is still pretty weak. main complains -- it doesnt recognize enough misspellings, it sometimes refuses to change even known misspellings, and no way to add words to a custom dictionary (how many times must i tap "ducking" and change it to my desired word?!)
That was just the first iteration of the keyboards ability's, the newest update introduced a bunch of new features like being able to zoom in and out of picture or a website and has greatly improved the cursor movemenmt when editing a documemt, since it's just software the possibilities are endless. The hardware part was done right the first time, touch enabled which means you no longer have to use the touchscreen to select things or move the cursor around, fantastic. After a few a more updates like the ones I listed there really won't be much of a difference, besides the Passport exists now and we really don't know when and what exactly the feature set will be in this new Apple keyboard. Like I said before though, I'm all in, I really like using my Passports keyboard because of it's touch features so I can only imagine that I will be equally impressed with Apples iteration.
Cool, I never used a Sony PS3 but that's pretty neat. I wasn't trying to say the Passport was first or anything, people here are to hung up on that. No, I was simply saying that I'm using this kind of technology now and love it.
People often fail to realize this. While I do think Samsung should have been punished, I still think Apple was not the one to be wronged. What Samsung copied is not an implementation detail (or prove that they stole code or blueprints...). They copied a look, therefore damaging the general public, making the layman incorrectly believe that their Galaxy phones were iPhones (seen Galaxy phones sold as "a cheaper iPhone" at phone dealerships...), or at best an acceptable equivalent with better value for the money... Which it is not.)
What I mean is, I believe Samsung imitated design and copied ideas: they therefore swindled people by abusing their lack of understanding of tech. The DoJ could have gone after them for that if they had thought it worth it. Apparently they didn't.
The part where Apple gets to sue based on patents describing the looks of their product is the part where patents (technical details) and brand recognition ( selling Catrier watches or Hemres scarves or Nicke shoes, or otherwise named stuff but visually identical) get confused together, and that is messy and leads to weird legal situations like the ones we witnessed over the last few years.
The system was designed wisely. Complexity in got via courts and overly broad patents only makes one type of people win. Lawyers.