techlover

AppleInsider said:

Retaining the top spot was perennial intellectual property leader IBM, awarded 7,355 patents in 2015. That was well ahead of second-place finisher Samsung, with 5,072 U.S. patents.

@nhughes If you add  #12 Samsung Display Co Ltd with its 1,838 patents to #2 Samsung Electronics Co Ltd at 5,072 they wind up being not that far behind IBM with 6,910 total. 

Samsung Display Co Ltd alone filed only 100 fewer than all of Apple. 

But, like you said in the article Apple patent filings can tip their hand at future products. Apple is likely filing many patents under the names of various shell companies in order to keep the competition off the scent of copying those future products. 

At the end of the day though its not the number of patents but the execution. Just like its not the size of the R&D budget but what is able to be done with it.

Thanks for the article.

pmz said:

Everyone always imagines extremes when it comes to uses for this technology....

...Apple will probably create a feature in Messages where you make a face, and it captures and converts it into an instant emoji.

That is a neat idea, but if that technology is ever implemented getting a poo emoji will never be the same.

johnjohnstone said:

....That $300 phone is costing you $18 a month. At T-mobile you can lease an iPhone6 for $23 a month. Do you seriously think people are not willing to spend that extra $5 to get an iPhone? 

Yes. If everyone was willing to pay the extra money for an iPhone then why doesn't everyone buy an iPhone? 

johnjohnstone said:

satchmo said:

You're looking at it from an Apple user/fan standpoint. I see value in an iPhone, but there are millions who don't.

iPhones continue to go up in price with little real world benefit, while lower costs phones do the job. With respect to that $5 difference, there are just as many options where the Android phone is even cheaper. A Moto G for instance, can be had for $180, unlocked.

As I said from the outset, Apple is not doomed. I just hope they don't fall asleep at the wheel, be complacent or lose sight of user and sentiments. 

Sorry you are wrong. If people only cared about price everyone would be driving $13k Nissa Versa. But the average cost of a USA car is close to $30k. And according to hundreds of survey's people think their smartphone is more essential and important than even their car. You really think they would risk having a crappy phone for saving a mere $5 month? These are the same people who buy $5 coffee at Starbucks every day without even thinking.

The iPhone user base will be close to 600,000,000 this year. Do you seriously think a huge chunk of that user base will buy a Moto G instead of an iPhone? LOL. No. 

Stop comparing a MotoG to an iPhone6. They are not even in the same stratosphere.

You are correct that the Moto G and the iPhone are not really in the same league. But read again what @satchmo said. 

They are not comparing a Moto G feature for feature, performance, and build quality to the iPhone.

What I think satchmo is saying that for $180 unlocked, there is a perfectly capable smartphone for sale for people that fits their needs. satchmo said a Moto G for instance. It is just one example of one phone, of which there are many... 

For instance, a 32 gig unlocked Nexus 6P which has been widely reviewed as one of the best recent flagship Android phones is $499. That same $499 can buy you brand new two-year old 32 gig unlocked iPhone 5s. So depending on who you are, you might find much better value in the Nexus.

I don't think that a huge chunk of people buy the Moto G specifically, but clearly most people choose a non-iPhone, especially globally. That is the issue that is being raised here.

Sorry satchmo if I put words in your mouth.

macmichiel said:

I have been using Macs since the LCIII and the Performa line. Never owned a single Windows machine and i never will. But i do have a problem. I don't game that much but i would like to enjoy awesome graphics if that is a feature of the game. Now I don't have the option to enjoy great graphics. In fact we never had ! Who cares if i play games for 5 minutes a week or 5 days a week ? All i ask is to have a CHOICE !...<SNIP>...I am kind of done waiting and i will NOT buy Windows-crap...<SNIP> OMG...

You could build a Windows gaming box. That would give you what you want, which is the latest cutting-edge graphics, as well as the largest library of games.

You could also build yourself a hackintosh box. That might actually suit your needs quite nicely. But don't expect the same performance and game library of a Windows machine.

At the end of the day, to get the best graphics performance with the all the latest bells and whistles you will still need to run most of the games from Windows. 

You might also look into a Steam Box, but the performance is not quite there and neither is the game library when compared to a Windows box of the same hardware.

I don't think buying a Mac Pro is money well spent for just gaming, neither would be buying an iMac. Both are completely capable machines but I wouldn't recommend buying either with just gaming in mind.

My genuine recommendation would be to build your own gaming rig with a clean Windows install with no third party garbage and enjoy yourself with the latest and greatest gaming experience. Everything else you can do on your Apple gear.

That is my best advice for you.

rogifan_old said:

lkrupp said:

Yet more evidence of the complete disconnect between the real world and the cockeyed universe of tech websites where so-called techies expound on the deficiencies of Apple products and declare such products epic failures... like the Apple TV for example. These ostriches solemnly report that, “I returned my AppleTV in disgust because (insert lame excuse or reason).” Meanwhile, back in the real world, people go about enjoying the new ATV, playing games, watching/listening to content, searching with Siri. Of course real users are dismissed as clueless morons who don’t know they have been hoodwinked by Apple’s crafty marketing. Then when the sales figures put them behind the eight ball, the so-called tech gods squirm like  tadpoles to explain the success of the product. 

I'm still baffled as to why some think the Apple Watch is confusing. If you know how to use an iPhone you should have no trouble using Apple Watch. And once you get the hang of it it's second nature. Swipe down for notifications; swipe up for glances. When on the watch face press the crown once to get to the app screen. Double press the crown to go to the last used app (similar to double pressing the home button to get the app switcher), single press to go back to the watch face (similar to pressing the home button to go back to the home screen). Single press the side button to get contacts; double press it to use Apple Pay. Force touch to get options. It's not complicated at all. The only thing that annoys me with the watch is launching apps is incredibly slow. I swear If that lag didn't exist there would be far fewer complaints about Apple Warch apps. I hope it's something that can be improved with software as I really don't want to replace my Watch next year. If it is hardware I hope Apple offers a generous trade-in program so we can swap out just the watch component with a new one.

I'm willing to bet that even if Apple doesn't offer the best price on a trade-in, it will be convenient enough to make it worth while when defraying the cost of the latest hotness.

No doubt there will be plenty of less convenient but possibly more lucrative options like eBay or Craigslist. I wouldn't be shocked to see Gazelle get in on the action as well.

Either way, depending on the condition, I bet you will be able to get at least 20 to 40 cents on the dollar selling the old Watch if you decide to purchase a new one by the time it comes out.

So worst case scenario you get $70 back on a $350 purchase for something that you have enjoyed using every day for the past year, give or take. 

Or pass it along as a hand-me-down. 

All of that being said, no doubt the software will get better too.