Google has had it, they are going to have all Apple products banned in the U.S

[Chakra-X]

It's absolutely disgusting imo, the iPhone was the next logical evolution of phones, and it doesn't take a genius to see that. [/URL]

I am torn, because it is silly to me that you can stop other companies from having a "pinch to zoom" feature. Apple calls these features "natural", yet wants to patent them as if they are some special technique they created


...But, I did not see any of this going on before the iPhone. Yes there devices with touch screens and what have you, but I honestly see that Apple standardized the "rounded rectangle with a black screen and square icons" look. Before the iPhone, the BlackBerry look was in and people were trying to cram a full keyboard with a 4:3 or square screen above it. The "in" thing for slide-out phones like the T-Mobile Sidekick, and business people felt important when they owned a BlackBerry or gray-scale PDA.

Then iPhone comes out, boasting media-centric abilities, compacitive touch screen, and 'app' centric operating system aligned in colorful rows. Now suddenly we have all kinds of manufacturers making big slabs of glass, even Google's recent Nexus commercials advertise their Siri counterpart. And while obviously Apple did not invent context-aware voice commands, they ran that as a selling point and now some phones do that as well.

I could get if all phone designs were migrating towards touch screens, but I feel like they were migrating to BlackBerry's style first and then suddenly switched course. Now I do not know if Apple should block innovation just because people have a taste of touch screens, but if I made something and it became popular with other people I compete with, I would expect some compensation.

 

[hleV]

Never really liked apples.

 

[Baaja]

I agree a lot with Chakra-X, but excuse me for bringing this up. As you all know, Samsung lost a huge patent case against Apple and were charged with 1 billion dollars in "fines". So if you are accused and found guilty of "copying", how the **** does that stop innovation?! Riddle me that. Now I understand that it was the next evolutional step, but Google told Samsung to back off in an internal memo, and to not go so close to the boundaries of Apple's patents. It was "too similar" but they still went ahead. I mean, Microsoft is moving with both a "Macbook Air/iPad" and "Icon-apps" in their Surface computer/tablet and Windows 8. Now that's innovation.

 

[Grega]

And on the other hand you have the most successful Mac OS the MacOS X which is a blatant ripoff of Unix, yet Apple is all high and mighty about their great new OS like they created the damn thing and not mostly copied it, wheres Apples own attempts at making an OS failed as shown by the pre OSX systems.

But even so, i bet that if you searched the archives, you would find a company that used the same feature that iPhones have before they came out (and i say feature, because apple is known to take things from various places and slapping them together).

Or how about the magnetic cord patent they are running. Its not like the whole of Japan hasnt been using that ever since rice cookers became a house hold item.

But yea worth watching -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFeC25BM9E0

 

[DaRkOwNs]

Apple isn't simply suing for the right to one or two ideas. They're suing over anything that could possibly be even close to their designs. That includes improved and modified versions of it. If you're never able to build off an idea, there's no progress. Not to mention all the patent ghosting that goes on. Also, big companies make very vague and non-specific blueprints to patent so that they can take anything that's kinda similar to court. It's called patent blanketing and it should be ******* illegal.

And a billion is chump change to these companies, why do they even bother with the fines?

 

[fuzzy]

And on the other hand you have the most successful Mac OS the MacOS X which is a blatant ripoff of Unix, yet Apple is all high and mighty about their great new OS like they created the damn thing and not mostly copied it, wheres Apples own attempts at making an OS failed as shown by the pre OSX systems.

Well, to be fair, OS X has a legitimate UNIX base system, Darwin. Darwin is more or less Open Source - with an Apple license, of course. The GUI, which is a completely separate concern, is, from what I know, completely Apple-made. So, not really a rip-off at all. They did what Android did too: Take an existing and proven base and build your own system on it.


Also, I can't agree that the iPhone was simply an evolutionary step. Ever used a phone before and tried to get applications and games for it? Shit was next to impossible with all the different and slow-as-hell J2ME phones. And while my HTC Magician (Windows Mobile 2003 SE) offered spectacular performance and theoretically no limitations as to what programs one can install, it still sucked. Why? No distribution system whatsoever. It simply didn't occur to any OS or phone vendor that this was necessary.
Apple single-handedly created a whole ecosystem, complete with one then-totally-advanced phone everyone would use, one centralized distribution system, with (relatively) secure billing support and a locked-down phone to prevent piracy. That's how they solved the chicken-and-egg problem: Both developers and users were happy.
There's just no other way to put it: Apple paved the way to smartphones as we know them now. Credit where it's due.

 

[Grega]

Well, to be fair, OS X has a legitimate UNIX base system, Darwin. Darwin is more or less Open Source - with an Apple license, of course. The GUI, which is a completely separate concern, is, from what I know, completely Apple-made. So, not really a rip-off at all. They did what Android did too: Take an existing and proven base and build your own system on it.


Also, I can't agree that the iPhone was simply an evolutionary step. Ever used a phone before and tried to get applications and games for it? Shit was next to impossible with all the different and slow-as-hell J2ME phones. And while my HTC Magician (Windows Mobile 2003 SE) offered spectacular performance and theoretically no limitations as to what programs one can install, it still sucked. Why? No distribution system whatsoever. It simply didn't occur to any OS or phone vendor that this was necessary.
Apple single-handedly created a whole ecosystem, complete with one then-totally-advanced phone everyone would use, one centralized distribution system, with (relatively) secure billing support and a locked-down phone to prevent piracy. That's how they solved the chicken-and-egg problem: Both developers and users were happy.
There's just no other way to put it: Apple paved the way to smartphones as we know them now. Credit where it's due.

And they attacked anyone wanting to do something similar. Its like Valve going against anyone who tried to do something similar to the STEAM client.

 

[macdaddymario]

And they attacked anyone wanting to do something similar. Its like Valve going against anyone who tried to do something similar to the STEAM client.

Exactly this.

 

[Almighty_Gir]

Apple is basically the Blizzard of the hardware world...

they take everyone elses ideas, polish them, and make great products out of them. so great that other people forget that the idea wasn't theirs to begin with.

and what Grega says, is absolutely correct... they're attacking anyone who wants to try and do anything similar, or better. and that's fundamentally wrong. if your product is great, it will sell itself over the competition. if it's not as great as you, or your brainwashed followers say it is, then it won't... and you'll have to resort to trying to blackball your opposition.

 

[Baaja]

Just to adress the "getting credit for something that you didn't do"...survival off the fittest within economy studies: it's usually not about who was the first to develop something, but who actually managed to pull it off. Nobody remembers the Windows "iPad" from early 2000... because it was bad. Apple gave it a new try, and now everybody is rolling out those kind of products.

In defense of Apple, there are a few things (patents) that characterizes and defines Apple, for what it is. Many of the patents that Samsung were copying were of that sort, yes I'm talking about rounded rectangles, and of course the company has a right to stop others from taking a free ride on their success.

I don't know if you guys do know, but Apple go through many many more iterations of simple things such as the look and feel of a product (e.g fonts). And when they finally find the perfect formula, which then has cost them a lot of money through R&D (yes, taking your time with finding the exact type of font or any other design idea, takes time and thus costs money), somebody else just blatantly copies this and can take a lesser price on their products as their costs are a lot less. (In tech, R&D costs are what drives prices). So patents are put in place so that innovators can protect these great formulas that they've cooked up. In the case of Apple vs. Samsung, it was obvious who would be the winner and it was just.

 

[Grega]

Yes, because a lot of that look and feel is apples own stuff to begin with. Im not saying their products are bad. Far from it, but they themselves are cashing in on the work of others while at the same time attacking people who want to do something similar to their design. Note "SIMILAR" not "SAME".

Watch the video i posted and listen to the chocolate cake reference. Its exactly what apple is doing ATM.

 

[Baaja]

Yes, I watched the video. So what the japs didn't patent the magsafe. Stupid dumb ****s? (btw I love japanese people and I've studied japanese). In business, the one that has the patent, was first with it. Ever watch the tv show "Dragons' Den", they always ask for patents because of this. Has patent = was the first, by the legal system. Morality is another issue. And yes, Apple is a recipe company, that is their strength. Ever heard the saying, "the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts". Chocolate cake is better than chocolate or cake, these are the ingredients. But Apple has a way of finding just the right recipe, what ingridients should be used and how much, then they drip it in that sweet Apple-hotsauce. And boom Apple figured out what consumers need. Whether it be mag-safe power cords or the unibody design. Nobody else thought of putting it in consumer products before, and that is why Apple is where they are today. People are now instead of innovating, trying to copy their recipe. (I think that it's worse to copy a recipe than making an own recipe out of the same ingredients).

The Asus Zenbook, trackpad, keyboard layout, the unibody design, the formfactor.. for ****s sake, even the damn packaging is a blatant copy! Apple isn't a technology company, it's a product company. They always seem to make beautiful and great products that work, and they do this through trial and error. Finding the right look and feel is something that is their greatest strength. I've realized through this discussion that I am an Apple-fanboy. Two weeks ago I saw the Retina Macbook Pro. I'd never think that I would feel the same orgasm-type feel as I've heard other people experience, but I was mesmerized by it's beauty and it was stunning. "I just had to have it!" That's the feeling Apple evokes with their products. And there is a reason for it.

But I think that people are being hypocrite atm. Everybody, Google, Samsung and even Apple, are stealing good ideas from others. However, Apple has been most successful these past 5 years than anyone else and is the biggest company in the world right now. Of course a lot of spotlight will hit them, and a lot of negativity will be directed at Apple because of it. It's unavoidable. If a strong company wants something, a patent, they will get it by buying up the patent holder or knock them to the ground. Others would have done the same and have done the same before. Survival of the fittest in capitalism. Why is it suddenly so wrong now? Jealousy, envy of PC/Android fanboys? Just asking...

 

[macdaddymario]

It's always been wrong, I've never once used an Apple product when I had a choice in the matter. When I was younger and didn't understand things like open and closed source development for example, I simply didn't like their GUI. Now that I know more, I disagree with any company that works entirely in closed source and then trys to sue ANYONE that does an idea similar to their own. If you're going to do something closed like that, you NEED to be open to other people taking similar steps to make their own product, and not rape the ever-living **** out of the patent system to make sure you stay on top.

It has nothing to do with people being hypocritical. Everyone knows that idea's are used from other people all the time.. But the people that use those idea, don't sue other people, or claim copyright anywhere near as much as Apple does.

 

[DaRkOwNs]

It's not the fact that they're claiming patents on everything (I don't agree with it, though) that annoys me. It's the fact that they're suppressing newer and better technology so that they can monopolize everything. And that's exactly what they're doing, despite the fact that it's supposed to be illegal. I don't see how they keep getting away with it.

 

[Grega]

Yes, I watched the video. So what the japs didn't patent the magsafe. Stupid dumb ****s? (btw I love japanese people and I've studied japanese). In business, the one that has the patent, was first with it. Ever watch the tv show "Dragons' Den", they always ask for patents because of this. Has patent = was the first, by the legal system. Morality is another issue. And yes, Apple is a recipe company, that is their strength. Ever heard the saying, "the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts". Chocolate cake is better than chocolate or cake, these are the ingredients. But Apple has a way of finding just the right recipe, what ingridients should be used and how much, then they drip it in that sweet Apple-hotsauce. And boom Apple figured out what consumers need. Whether it be mag-safe power cords or the unibody design. Nobody else thought of putting it in consumer products before, and that is why Apple is where they are today. People are now instead of innovating, trying to copy their recipe. (I think that it's worse to copy a recipe than making an own recipe out of the same ingredients).

The Asus Zenbook, trackpad, keyboard layout, the unibody design, the formfactor.. for ****s sake, even the damn packaging is a blatant copy! Apple isn't a technology company, it's a product company. They always seem to make beautiful and great products that work, and they do this through trial and error. Finding the right look and feel is something that is their greatest strength. I've realized through this discussion that I am an Apple-fanboy. Two weeks ago I saw the Retina Macbook Pro. I'd never think that I would feel the same orgasm-type feel as I've heard other people experience, but I was mesmerized by it's beauty and it was stunning. "I just had to have it!" That's the feeling Apple evokes with their products. And there is a reason for it.

But I think that people are being hypocrite atm. Everybody, Google, Samsung and even Apple, are stealing good ideas from others. However, Apple has been most successful these past 5 years than anyone else and is the biggest company in the world right now. Of course a lot of spotlight will hit them, and a lot of negativity will be directed at Apple because of it. It's unavoidable. If a strong company wants something, a patent, they will get it by buying up the patent holder or knock them to the ground. Others would have done the same and have done the same before. Survival of the fittest in capitalism. Why is it suddenly so wrong now? Jealousy, envy of PC/Android fanboys? Just asking...

You didnt get the cake reference at all. The idea is that you take something already existing and then improve it. (Someone invented the chocolate cake and apple added a minty topping). Thats all OK and good, but whats not OK in the least is that you then want to prevent anyone from doing what you just did (Someone decides to take that cake with minty topping and adds a few strawberries on top and then apple goes you cant do that, because anything that involves chocolate cake belongs to us).

Thats neither fair, nor in the spirit of capitalism. Quite far from it. Its plain and simple corruption due to a faulty patent system that should have been revised years ago.

Hopefully this clash with google will be a big enough smack for that to happen. Because if apple successfully wins all their patent lawsuits, then they will kill themselves off, because they will run everyone out of business that gives them the technology to even create their products.

 

[Baaja]

You didnt get the cake reference at all. The idea is that you take something already existing and then improve it. (Someone invented the chocolate cake and apple added a minty topping). Thats all OK and good, but whats not OK in the least is that you then want to prevent anyone from doing what you just did (Someone decides to take that cake with minty topping and adds a few strawberries on top and then apple goes you cant do that, because anything that involves chocolate cake belongs to us).

Now I'm hungry, but you got your point across and now I understand what you are saying. However, yes it is indeed not fair nor in the spirit of capitalism, but it is a biproduct of it. And yes, it's due to the patent system. I guess I just want to defend something that I already know is bad and blame it on something else. But everybody is doing it :/ But yeah, Apple is doing it the most at the moment. But I find that to be the legacy of Steve Jobs. I think the lawsuits will come to an end, because that was the way he ran the company.

I read last week that Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, and Larry Page, CEO of Google, and other higher executives are participating in discussions to not go to court against each other or at least to find some sort of solution to the patents they have used belonging to the other party. I guess this is how Tim Cook runs it, more diplomatic, because I know Jobs was pretty crazy going for other companies ("Willing to go to thermonuclear war").

And Samsung is trying to differentiate between it's component manufacturing and phone production divisions so that this patent feud would not involve Apple's and Samsung's important relationship. However, recent rumors said that Apple is trying to find someone else capable of producing their phone/tablet chips. Which is I guess a backup solution for a "what if"-situation.

 

[Deman]

And people look at me like I'm Jinx when I say Google is Skynet.