|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 10:30 AM EDT |
They did. Android is superior to Apple's products in more ways to me than I
care to count. Your challenge is false - companies have done the phone better
than Apple - Apple is now falling back on highly suspect design attributes.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: mrisch on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 10:37 AM EDT |
Imagine if Apple had a design patent on the Mac UI when it
sued Microsoft. We might have had a completely different
outcome. That is the scariest part of this decision for me.
If the Epic 4G can escape liability as being different
enough, I can live with not having iPhone lookalikes. But if I
can't design a UI that looks similar due to aesthetic
functional considerations, then I'm worried.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: mossc on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 10:45 AM EDT |
when you post as Anonymous, it would be helpful if you at least used an alias to
sign your messages.
That way we can at least make sense of the threads and see when an individual
feels so strongly about a specific point that he/she keeps posting the same
thing over and over in every thread.
I feel that anonymity is useful in some cases but it should not be used to
confuse the discussion.
A pseudonym can be just as anonymous and still have easy to follow conversations
and debates.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 11:14 AM EDT |
Should functionality belong to only one company?
The law on design is no. And round corners are
functional, in that they are safer and they are
easier to slip in and out of pockets and such.
Yet Apple wants to own that.
How about how you touch a tablet? If you can
sell a tablet without a manual because how
you use it is so intuitive, that means it's
not an invention so much as an implementation
of obvious things.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 11:17 AM EDT |
When it came out people described it as a phone designed by
lawyers to not offend apple. Fat lot of good it did, I hear
Apple are going after it anyway thereby proving this is all
about gaming the system for competitive advantage.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 11:32 AM EDT |
Then Apple should be held to the same standard and stop
recycling Braun's old designs.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: quintesse on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 01:10 PM EDT |
You have to remember that buying a gadget is (for many
people at least) as much as a fashion statement as being
something useful. Which means that if you don't follow that
current fashion you're bound to sell much less of your
product.
You can see that everywhere, cars often look alike, many of
the clothes for the new season have the same recurring
themes, etc.
Now imagine that companies can patent all of that. That
would mean that to make any money (ie not pay too much in
license fees) you'd need to be different each time. And
different in a fashion-conscious market is only interesting
to a much smaller segment of the market (the ones that
always want something different from the rest of the
people).
Apple is trying to force Samsung to try and sell 70s bell-
bottom pants in today's market, which it shouldn't have to.
For Samsung it is already impossible to create a real iPad
or iPhone because Apple makes that impossible (seems similar
to IBM wanting to make it impossible for others to make IBM
PC compatible computers) so they're making their own product
and using a design that is currently fashionable.
To me that's okay as long as they don't pretend that they're
actually selling an Apple (compatible) product.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 01:12 PM EDT |
I think that it is a stretch to interpret Apple's attack on Android as an attack
on
FOSS. I think Apple is fine with FOSS (WebKit, Darwin etc.). What they are not
OK
with is spending a lot of time and effort recreating the concept of the
smartphone, which they did, and having Google/Samsung copy them so closely.
Android was aimed at Nokia and it's half-screen half keyboard set-up. If Apple
hadn't come up with the iPhone as a bitmapped computer we would still be
getting these half and halfs from Android and Samsung. Do I think that Apple
should own world? No. Do I think Android is a stolen product? No. But I see why
Jobs was angry. Do I think this is about attacking FOSS. Not at all.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: deck2 on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 01:22 PM EDT |
With the report on Groklaw on this case, it seem to be barraged by so many
Anonymous posters that support Apple. Apple is becoming the new Evil. That is
why Microsoft supports this ruling. The only thing I find about these trolls is
that they are a little more polite.
Why is it that big companies like Apple loved free markets when they started but
now despised them and crave for a Corporatist world.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 04:35 PM EDT |
"Have Samsung take a look at how phones are used today and come up with
something better."
Samsung has come up "something better". That's why they are
outselling Apple 2 to 1.
Sometimes it all out there in front of you; you just have to open your eyes.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 04:41 PM EDT |
And the answer within the context of
locking up knowledge that Society
already has
when the Law of Patents is supposed to be
an exchange of
the harm of a limited monopoly to disseminate knowledge the public does not
have
is blindingly wrong!
Sorry, but "a rectangle with rounded
corners" has been known to Society for decades.
1950's tv.
1950's table.
Seriously...
A: How far
back in time must one go?
B: How many different product examples must
one give?
before "rectangle with rounded corners" can be considered an
obvious application to a device?
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: eric76 on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 05:36 PM EDT |
Won't choice be improved by pushing other companies to innovate
rather than copy?
In most cases, to improve X, first you have to
be able to use X.
Being barred from using X does not encourage innovation
-- it stifles innovation. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Why oh why - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 06:47 PM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: knarf on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 06:31 PM EDT |
OK, it seems to be time for a car analogy again. Sorry 'bout that, folks, but
the sheer weight of these 'reasonable' supporters of the fruity verdict and the
assumption that these fine folks are amongst those who are best served by
simple, clear instructions makes it almost mandatory to post one.
So, car analogy.
"Won't choice be improved by pushing other companies to innovate rather
than copy?"
The next year's Paris autosalon will be filled with cars on legs, cars on tank
threads, cars on pogo sticks, cars with front view mirrors because they drive in
reverse by default, cars which roll like hamster balls, cars which crawl like
inchworms... anything but cars on wheels, as those have recently been patented
by the FruitCo car company.
See, the patent system helps stimulate innovation! Insanely great!
---
[ "Omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur
et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est." ]
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 08:49 PM EDT |
You call being forced to implement workarounds for a less
desirable feature and putting all the chips in one
corporation or one Oligopoly's hands "INNOVATION"?
This is surely shaping up to be a battle in the netherworld.
Where the only ones truly seeing the light are the Good Guys
and the Evil form of competition by sabotaging our consumer
rights and freedom is on a mission to deprive of CHOICE!!!
For once the Open Source Community has banded together in an
Alliance (OHA) of Mobile Device Makers and the only company
willing to spend whatever it takes to keep those choices
OPEN!!! .....I don't see any of the Proprietary
Corporations even attempting to give to the community a positive look into our
future with freedom, besides Google![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: odysseus on Wednesday, August 29 2012 @ 10:24 AM EDT |
This is exactly the line I am seeing being pushed in just about every media
outlet available, including the BBC. It smells to me like a prepared Apple line
that they've fed to the media and their friends on the net to try divert
attention from the fact the ideas are not theirs to start with.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
