decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Mission: present Apple as the un-cool choice | 306 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
I think you are giving the public too much credit
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 02 2012 @ 07:33 PM EDT
Sure, among anyone who reads articles and thinks about the
legal issues involved, Apple is looking pretty bad right
now, and will look progressively worse over the near future.

But I fear the iPhone-buying public just doesn't give a rip.
They see the iPhone, and it is a well-made, quality device
that works well and is generally more trouble-free than its
Android competitors (this is coming from a big Android fan,
mind you). They don't seem to currently care that Apple's
suppliers literally work people to death in Asian
sweatshops, so why should they care about legal battles
between two multinational megacorporations?

For middle-class and above folks, the iPhone isn't "cool",
it is simply "normal", and people who worry about software,
patents, etc. are just geeks.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Mission: present Apple as the un-cool choice
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, September 03 2012 @ 12:53 PM EDT
Awesome idea and perfect timing!

The scarcity is gone, the model-to-model differentiation only reveals me as a
locked-in slave to the 2-year upgrade cycle. iPhone/iPad ownership has gone from
early-adopter cool to uh?

The cool kids have moved on.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Mission: present Apple as the un-cool choice
Authored by: soronlin on Wednesday, September 05 2012 @ 06:18 AM EDT
Apple have not been the girl throwing the hammer since the first Macintosh
Computer was released. They have always been Big Brother.

The Macintosh was a single closed-specification box and 100% GUI with no command
line anywhere. But to program it you bought a development kit that created a
command-line. Apple did not eat its own dog food. To make hardware for it, or
even to open the box, you paid more money to Apple. This at the time the IBM PC
came with a circuit diagram and a listing of the BIOS.

Apple has got better over the years; at least now some of their kit is based on
open hardware and open software. But you still can not open the box, not even to
change a battery.

They make nice kit, but it works the way Apple says it works and it does what
Apple says it does. It's built for maximum profit. If you don't like it, tough;
Apple don't want partners, they want customers. If they want your opinion
they'll form a focus group, otherwise shut-up and pay up.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )