Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 14th Mar 2010 15:12 UTC
Legal It's no secret to anyone that while Apple sued HTC, the lawsuit is more about Google than HTC itself. Since Android is open source, and owned by no one, it's kind of hard to go after Google itself, and as such, HTC was the prime target, since it is the number one Android smartphone maker. The New York Times has an in-depth article up about the subject, with a whole boatload of quotes from people within the two companies, and it paints a picture of all this being a highly emotional and personal vendetta - especially from Apple's side.
Order by: Score:
Insecurity in the form of arrogance?
by porcel on Sun 14th Mar 2010 17:04 UTC
porcel
Member since:
2006-01-28

How much confidence does Apple really have in its own products?

To want to push out others from a market it has entered and to feel that it is rightfully its own by virtue of having a successful products is arrogance at its best.

I support both iPhones and the Android "Magic" and "Heroes" at my company. They are both good phones, but by far I prefer the latter to the former in flexibility and reliability.

It is this feeling that I am not part of Apple's target group that always pushes me away from their products.

However nice, I always find them too restrictive and debating any problems with Apple's loyal fan base often seems like a complete exercise in futility because the starting premise often is that anything that Apple puts out is perfect all of the time for everyone.

Peace out.

Reply Score: 12

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Hence I decided not to go for the iPhone and got rid of my iPod Touch; at the end of the day I actually wonder how much hype is behind these phones versus what end users really want. It reminds me of Vodafone who found that many customers just wanted a plan ordinary phone that did text messaging and telephone calls - nothing fancy. Are we going to end up having a similar backlash as people start to demand a phone that works? there seems to be cycles of consolidating then specialisation then consolidating coming in cycles.

For me I've kept my iPod Classic, I have a very basic NZ$140 ZTE Telecom branded phone with very good battery life, and a USB ZTE 3G dongle for broadband mobile internet. Three separate devices but I'm happy knowing that when the battery dies on my iPod, I can still make calls, and when I've run out of cash on my 3G dongle I can still make phone calls on my phone.

Reply Score: 4

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

The biggest problem that Apple has, and it has happened throughout their history, is that they have often been first to a market with a clever and integrated product.

The problems then start once other competitors start responding to it credibly, and in particular, responding with cheaper devices with potentially larger economies of scale in supply and demand and also with a large economy of scale and flexibility in the application base. It happened in the PC market, and despite a slight resurgence for Macs in recent years they just don't have the supply or economies of scale to fund a market like the one for the PC as a whole.

Apple knows they can't respond to that and so they lash out, usually legally in some form.

Having just completed reading the article, that's exactly what Mitch Kapor says:

While mobile phone developers favor the iPhone for now, "they are all racing ahead to develop for Android, too," Mr. Kapor says. "Tight control helps in the beginning, but it tends to choke things in the long term."


Edited 2010-03-15 16:13 UTC

Reply Score: 6

Comment by robojerk
by robojerk on Sun 14th Mar 2010 17:14 UTC
robojerk
Member since:
2006-01-10

That scene from Pirates of Silicone Valley immediately jumped in my head where Jobs accuses Gates of stealing from him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im589uTchKs

Reply Score: 10

RE: Comment by robojerk
by Eddyspeeder on Sun 14th Mar 2010 22:36 UTC in reply to "Comment by robojerk"
Eddyspeeder Member since:
2006-05-10

Haha exactly.

And then especially the bit at 1:20 where Jobs screams out: "You're STEALING from US!". I could only picture the below quote happening in exactly the same way:

"(...) several meetings took place between the two companies, which, according to the NYT, heated up very quickly. Jobs accused Google of stealing (...)"

Reply Score: 2

Huh??
by brichpmr on Sun 14th Mar 2010 18:16 UTC
brichpmr
Member since:
2006-04-22

Apple rightfully has plenty of confidence in their products, and the marketplace seems to agree. One doesn't need to 'like' Apple to benefit from the excellence of their products; and that also applies to Google, Microsoft, et al. I say, just use the right tool for the job.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Huh??
by darknexus on Sun 14th Mar 2010 19:07 UTC in reply to "Huh??"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Apple rightfully has plenty of confidence in their products

Obviously they don't, or they'd let the product stand on its own instead of bullying everyone else around them. That seems to indicate a huge insecurity on Apple's part, their products aren't good enough so they go after others. For the record, I think a lot of their products are actually pretty good, however their pricing isn't. Compare the iPhone and Nexus One, the Nexus One can do everything the iPhone can do and some things it can't, yet is 2/3 the price of an unlocked iPhone. If you're on a network that supports the Nexus One, it's a logical choice over the iPhone on price/functionality at least for techies.
Apple could compete if they were willing to cut their margins a little. But they aren't, and they're scared they won't be able to maintain them. Instead of looking at their business plan though, they're simply lashing out. Stupid, and I think it'll be far worse for them in the long run.

Reply Score: 15

RE[2]: Huh??
by vivainio on Sun 14th Mar 2010 19:39 UTC in reply to "RE: Huh??"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

Obviously they don't, or they'd let the product stand on its own instead of bullying everyone else around them. That seems to indicate a huge insecurity on Apple's part, their products aren't good enough so they go after others.


Apple's products probably are good enough - Apple's problem is that high-end smartphone market is getting commodized fast. Apple has a certain head start and they can rake in money for a period of time before others catch/surpass them. Now, they need to start suffocating the market by litigation to retain shareholder value.

They know the large app store is not going to keep them going forever either; phone is very different from a PC where Windows dominates, so Apple can't really become "Microsoft of smartphones", nevermind how much they'd like to.

Regarding the technology in general - Apple has certain head start with touch screen technology so they were the ones to deploy various touch screen optimizations first. This does not mean they should be able to keep touch screen market hostage for the years to come.

Edited 2010-03-14 19:46 UTC

Reply Score: 7

RE[3]: Huh??
by kaiwai on Mon 15th Mar 2010 03:51 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Huh??"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Apple's products probably are good enough - Apple's problem is that high-end smartphone market is getting commodized fast. Apple has a certain head start and they can rake in money for a period of time before others catch/surpass them. Now, they need to start suffocating the market by litigation to retain shareholder value.

They know the large app store is not going to keep them going forever either; phone is very different from a PC where Windows dominates, so Apple can't really become "Microsoft of smartphones", nevermind how much they'd like to.

Regarding the technology in general - Apple has certain head start with touch screen technology so they were the ones to deploy various touch screen optimizations first. This does not mean they should be able to keep touch screen market hostage for the years to come.


Assuming people just purchase it on price alone; smart phones in the enterprise are as much dictated by the quality of the platform to develop on as its ability to hook into a enterprise back end. The problem will only start to occur when it comes to customers wanting greater integration with their existing systems which will include the Windows and Office systems that might end up tripping them up - especially if the dependent backends will be reliant on Silverlight technology. If Microsoft provides the stuff required but in only Silverlight form it will form Apple's hand to allow Silverlight (and in turn Flash) on the iPhone.

Their lust for complete control is going to face head on with large customers who aren't going to put up with Apple's fickleness and decide that the 10,000 phone contract will go to a WM7, Blackberry, Symbian or Android/WebOS vendor out there. I have a feeling when the almighty dollar is concerned Steve will eventually suck in his bottom lip and make some cock 'n ball story of how 'things have changed and thus should be allowed on the phone'.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Huh??
by kvarbanov on Mon 15th Mar 2010 08:44 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Huh??"
kvarbanov Member since:
2008-06-16

replying to "vivainio" :

Apple's products probably are good enough - Apple's problem is that high-end smartphone market is getting commodized fast. Apple has a certain head start and they can rake in money for a period of time before others catch/surpass them. Now, they need to start suffocating the market by litigation to retain shareholder value.

I can't, unfortunately, vote up, as I have recently done the same, so I would just add my support for the above statement. I tend to disregard what Apple says these days, because it's all about the lawsuits. And, I kind of get the feeling that Apple is getting angry about the rivals that don't sleep ...

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Huh??
by Tuishimi on Sun 14th Mar 2010 22:39 UTC in reply to "RE: Huh??"
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

it's a logical choice over the iPhone on price/functionality at least for techies

This part is key, btw.

They have plenty of confidence, they just want to dominate completely.

Reply Score: 4

It's not about ownership
by danieldk on Sun 14th Mar 2010 18:25 UTC
danieldk
Member since:
2005-11-18

Since Android is open source, and owned by no one, it's kind of hard to go after Google itself,

The user interface code *is* owned by Google. They own the copyrights, and they distribute it. As such, Apple could easily sue Google. But where does it get them? Google does not directly profit from Android, they only do from advertisements, and their app store.

Suing HTC is far more effective. First of all, because Apple wants to receive patent tax for every Android phone sold. Since HTC sells phones, it is the right place to get it. Second, this sends a message to other phone set makers: license or IP, or the same thing will happen to you.

While the Cocoa Touch-based interface is innovative, it is a shame things like multi-finger gestures should be locked behind patents for 15 years. They will soon become so commonplace, that a whole lot of people will have to pay up. The negative impact on society is really bad, up to the point where you can not write a piece of code without violating a bunch of patents. The term for software patents should be shortened enormously (say, to three years, enough to give competitive advantage), or software patents should die immediately.

Reply Score: 13

RE: It's not about ownership
by flanque on Mon 15th Mar 2010 11:43 UTC in reply to "It's not about ownership"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

software patents should die immediately

That'll do.

Reply Score: 2

RE: It's not about ownership
by Soulbender on Mon 15th Mar 2010 13:29 UTC in reply to "It's not about ownership"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Suing HTC is far more effective.


Well, the things is that HTC has been in the phone business much longer than Apple and it is only to be expected that Apple infringes on quite a few of HTC's patents. Probably more than HTC infringes Apple aptents. It's a really dumb move.

Reply Score: 5

The App-Starter...
by neitileple on Sun 14th Mar 2010 19:14 UTC
neitileple
Member since:
2010-03-14

When I read the news about Apple suing HTC, I pre-ordered a Desire the following day.


I will do my best to convince my friends, my wife and my wife's friends that they should buy Android phones, and not iPhones... With an Android phone they can soon even play Farmville and play videos from Crunchyroll, etc. (I know very well what they want from their phones...)

I have had Apple computers since OS9.

I now use a real PC with Windows7.
Luckily I didn't buy the 10.5 "upgrade". I stopped at 10.4-something.

When my wife's Macbook breaks I will do my very best to convince her to chose another brand.

(I know very well what she dislikes and what she thinks is missing with Apple products, that the other computers have. I will even offer to buy/pay for the new PC for her to be sure she doesn't chose Apple...)



Why?



-Because of Apple's dictatorship.

-DRM'ish behavior.

-App-Store Dictatorship.

-Sync-Dictatorship.

-And now their dirty tricks.


I have had two iPhones, I gave both away.

I know very well how "fantastic" the iPhone is:
After a while the iPhone feels only like an app-starter with icons on a desktop. How boring is that!!! Except from 'starting apps' what can the iPhone do? Think this one through: If you don't start an app, what can you do!?

And the iPhone's sound quality when calling sucks... The K510i is 10 times better...

So after seeing Apple's dictatorship, I turned from Apple-promoter to Apple hater during the last year...

I cannot support a company that acts like this.

I'm sad I fell for the Apple-crap, years ago...

I will not answer anyone, just reread what I wrote and let it sink in:

Think about what I told you the next time you let your finger scroll through your iPhone-desktop to start another App:

The iPhone IS just an App-Starter, it's the only thing the phone can do... Why? ---> Control and dictatorship. Control and dictatorship...)



Try to do something without starting an app. see what i mean? Control... Dictatorship...

(Who has 100% control over your apps? Do I have to "spoon it in" for you??!)


Edited 2010-03-14 19:17 UTC

Reply Score: 9

RE: The App-Starter...
by vivainio on Sun 14th Mar 2010 20:12 UTC in reply to "The App-Starter..."
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

So after seeing Apple's dictatorship, I turned from Apple-promoter to Apple hater during the last year...


Apple made a 180 with these patents.

Even the app store lockdown is ethically ok - it's their phone and app store, they can do whatever they want with it. If developers want to develop for iPhone regardless, and users buy them, it's their problem (they essentially give up the right to whine by signing up). It's the same thing as the "microsoft tax".

Now, OTOH, Apple is actively trying to bring others down through exploiting mistakes made earlier by patent officials. This is something Microsoft is not able to do because they are being observed by various legal entities.

Reply Score: 5

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

The MS tax - referring to imposed Windows license - would be different in my opinion. Where developers may choose to produce apps and be bound by Apple's decisions and consumers can clearly see that the hardware and OS are a bundled product, consumers rarely have the choice to by any computer without Windows preinstalled.

I don't think the two choices are comparable until "no OS" is as general an option with hardware purchases as "develop for another platform" is already for programmers.

I do agree that a part of the problem is developers choosing to write for the platform and thus, supporting Apple's treatment of consumers. I just suggest that there is some valid basis for complaints about the "windows tax".

Reply Score: 3

BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

Can you buy an iphone without an OS? or a Mac?

Thought not. Bringing up the MS Tax is irrelevant to the discussion.

Reply Score: 2

RE: The App-Starter... - overall fair
by jabbotts on Sun 14th Mar 2010 21:22 UTC in reply to "The App-Starter..."
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

I'd say your point overall is fair. We'll see how long people not glamoured by the Iphone will remain the minority.

The only thing I don't get is the difference between Apple providing default applications including a dialer and every other phone on the market providing default applications including a dialer. They are all a menu system for launching phone related applets; Iphone just made the application menu the default view instead of a blank background displaying the current time.

I do agree that they impose far too much control; I just see it happening at a different level from the default interface view.

Reply Score: 2

RE: The App-Starter...
by concurrentcoder on Sun 14th Mar 2010 21:44 UTC in reply to "The App-Starter..."
concurrentcoder Member since:
2008-04-16

You gave AWAY your iPhones etc and switched to using to Windows 7 because you think Apple is a dictatorship and Microsoft or Google are not?
I could have sworn that they are all public companies legally obligated to shareholders before any customer, even you. Get off your high horse, you sound like Thom inserting his little opinions and bias in the last sentence. And as you just joined the site, I suspect you are him.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: The App-Starter...
by neitileple on Sun 14th Mar 2010 22:28 UTC in reply to "RE: The App-Starter..."
neitileple Member since:
2010-03-14

I'm sorry.

He writes 100 times better than me.

I registered just now to write some of my frustration, and maybe make someone think.



Greetings from: no-to-apple = neitileple.



(He doesn't know Norwegian language... My nic is in Norwegian.)

I guess Dutch have some words from Norwegian, but they are just a few...

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: The App-Starter...
by Tuishimi on Sun 14th Mar 2010 22:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: The App-Starter..."
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

You made me think.

You made me think that once again people miss the point.

My wife is very non-techy and she loves her iPhone because of the simplicity of the interface and the "locked down" app store that has (to her) extremely useful apps that are (again) super easy to use.

As someone else mentioned above: it's a logical choice over the iPhone on price/functionality at least for techies

That's basically what you could say about all the other "smart phones." That or "if you don't mind an ugly interface that you have to poke through to get what you want."

I am pleased for you that you like your PC with Windows 7, and it is of course a free world to espouse your beliefs and to champion your likes and belittle your dislikes, but don't do your wife and her friends/family a disservice by convincing them to drop their iPhones just because YOU don't like Apple and their policies; if they have problems with it, and you can offer a better solution, then fine. But if you just want everyone else to think and be like you, then contemplate diversity and a world where you are free to be an individual, or a sheep, but at least your option to choose.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: The App-Starter...
by lemur2 on Mon 15th Mar 2010 02:40 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: The App-Starter..."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I am pleased for you that you like your PC with Windows 7, and it is of course a free world to espouse your beliefs and to champion your likes and belittle your dislikes, but don't do your wife and her friends/family a disservice by convincing them to drop their iPhones just because YOU don't like Apple and their policies; if they have problems with it, and you can offer a better solution, then fine. But if you just want everyone else to think and be like you, then contemplate diversity and a world where you are free to be an individual, or a sheep, but at least your option to choose.


No-one will have any option to choose if Apple are succesful (despite the fact that Apple did not invent smartphones) in their quest to become the only company that is allowed to make smartphones.

I think you are the one missing the point.

Edited 2010-03-15 02:42 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: The App-Starter...
by Tuishimi on Mon 15th Mar 2010 04:04 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: The App-Starter..."
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

That's FUD.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: The App-Starter...
by tupp on Mon 15th Mar 2010 06:33 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: The App-Starter..."
tupp Member since:
2006-11-12

Apple certainly makes efforts to limit the options of those who are non-Apple users. If Apple's litigation is successful, it could set dangerous precedents.

The Psystar case may have already set one of these dangerous precedents, in spite of the fact that the DMCA-based ruling contradicted fair use laws that have been in place decades prior to the DMCA.

These fair use laws are based on basic trade principles that have existed in the western world for at least a millennium. Apple might have just killed forever these basic laws and principles which protected US consumers for so long, all in the name of dubious legislation that was recently pushed through the US congress by the greedy media lobby. Even more scary is that Apple blatantly abused and twisted the the law to get its way: the DMCA is supposed to prevent media piracy, but Psystar wasn't pirating anything -- Psystar paid full retail for their media.

It will probably take a Supreme Court ruling to correct this travesty of justice/legislation.

No. Time and time again, Apple's actions have demonstrated that it is utterly nefarious. I wouldn't put it past Apple to use any unscrupulous means to stifle competition and to destroy basic consumer rights in the process.

Apple did not invent most of the multi-touch gestures nor did they invent the multi-touch phone. If they want to prohibit and lock-in their stupid users, that is fine, but they should not try to prohibit non-Apple users from enjoying technology that they did not invent.

Edited 2010-03-15 06:45 UTC

Reply Score: 7

RE[4]: The App-Starter...
by r_a_trip on Mon 15th Mar 2010 09:56 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: The App-Starter..."
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

I'll leave the ethical questions up to others, but...

Who is doing the technical support? If his wife is self-sufficient with a Mac, leave well alone. Politics can kill a relationship.

If she is dependent on her better/lesser half for tech support...

When I have to be the helpdesk, the second line tech support, the system builder and I can't dodge it because of blood ties, I'll try my very best to get them to accept the stuff I can and am willing to support. (Yes, I'm a mini Apple in that respect). They are free to forego my offer, but I'm very clear to them that I'm not the maid they can call in to clean up the mess, when (not if) they screw up.

When it comes to Apple. It's not on my radar as an option. While it may look ideal for a non-tech user to have an overlord deciding what is and isn't good for them, sooner or later they will find themselves on the short end of a decision. That is the price you ultimately have to pay when you opt for a little safety and convenience over freedom.

Seems hypocricital? When I exert such force too? Well, if you opt to stay ignorant of the workings of the devices you use, you will have to outsource your maintenance. One way or another, you'll have to pay the piper. At least with me, if I take on your case, it'll cost you very little. With Apple you'll pay handsomely to be owned.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: The App-Starter...
by neitileple on Mon 15th Mar 2010 12:57 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: The App-Starter..."
neitileple Member since:
2010-03-14

My wife is very competent, she manages her pc and programs and OS herself. Both on Windows and her Mac.

I (mis)guided her into this Apple-mess, and I will do my best to help her out of this... Before we met she was Windows only and she didn't want Apple. And she found many shortcomings with the MacOS. (They are still there.)

I am the one suffering, paying thousands when she wants the new this and that...

Why did I have two iPhones before I understood how bad it was? you might ask.

Well, actually I hated my first iPhone already after a few months, and wanted an Android then, but I bought my wife's old iPhone so she could buy the new 3GS. So I lived with the "new" iPhone 3G for another year, never doing a single complain, no hints/sour comments or anything.

Of'Course. Why should I let it sour my relationship with her? No way... I didn't do this gladly, but I did i for her with no comments attached. (Apple is just a small crap company... Soon I'm very much over it and will not even think about Apple. Soon I have the HTC Desire! But I will air my frustrations here once and then go on.)

Er det ikke deilig å ha noen å hate? - Doesn't it feel great to have someone to hate? ;)


But this time i ordered Android-phone. And I will leave the muddy Apple-fields for good.

And if someone wonder how I could afford to give away two iPhones? I could afford to throw them, if I was single. ;) I gave the last one away half a year ago and I used a W910i which is a wonderful phone... while saving money to cash for an Android phone. And there were no 1GHz phones available in my country, so I had to wait for it to come to my country... The W910i can multitask between browser, games, other programs at the same time. It has FANTASTIC sync-functionality. It has GPS. It can run Google Maps. It has accelerometer, light sensor so it dims the screen a bit if it is dark in the room, or brighten if it's sunny, etc.

I can connect the W910i to a Win/Lin or even Mac computer, and I can get the phone memory and mediacard up as external harddisks in any of the OS'es. I have full access and full control over everything on my phone. This is the only reason I would have needed to Switch. Sync on iPhone sucks...

And the physical buttons are great when doing games, etc.

The only thing I miss with the W910i is a bigger/different keyboard and that it should play all youtube/crunchyroll videos, support flash, Word-documents, etc.

If you go to www.getjar.com (or m.getjar.com on your phone) and you see how much your small phone can do:
There are over 4000 apps available for the W910i, and for tons of other phones,too.

-OPERA Mini 5 for surfing.
-Google Maps (and MokBee World) for maps/gps.
-Snaptu for Picasa, Flickr, Facebook, YOUTUBE, etc.
-Facebook app.
-Lots of games.
-Libris for reading eBooks (from manybooks.net for example.)

When I saw what the small SE W910i could do, iPhone's "bright glory" faded to a dim mist of stealing...

Then I really saw that the iPhone was built on others work, and was made by buying up other companies to get in touch, or should I say "in multitouch", with evolution. (And not revolution, as many people think.)

Yes I have mentioned it to my wife, if maybe I should buy a Windows laptop for her next time? She said, noooo... But after a second she smiled and said just like Teodor (a Norwegian kind of Winnie the Pooh,): Ja, takk. Begge deler! - Yes, thanks, Both! ;)

http://img.nrk.no/img/429307.jpeg





Edit: removed ) at end.

Edited 2010-03-15 13:04 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: The App-Starter...
by ricegf on Mon 15th Mar 2010 13:35 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: The App-Starter..."
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

Well, I've been a Linux enthusiast since around 2000 (bear with me - there's a point, and I'm getting back to iPhone and Android in a sec, I promise!). My wife switched to Linux in 2007.

I didn't push hard for her to switch from Windows XP. Rather, each time I provided "technical support", I just casually mentioned why I never had that problem. "Another crash lost your data? I'm sorry. No, my computer hasn't crashed yet this month - it's Linux." "You *might* have a virus, let's scan and see. No, I don't need to scan my computer, too - it's Linux."

She's been very happy with her Ubuntu laptop, especially not having to worry about accidentally opening a virus-laden email.

She's getting deeply into digital photography now, and beginning to cast longing eyes toward Adobe software not supported on Linux. We may need to reload her WinXP into a VirtualBox session for just that.

But that's fine. I'm tech support, not management. :-D

So. If you decide to encourage your loved ones to move from iPhone to a more open mobile device, I recommend the carrot rather than the stick. If it really *is* best for them, helping them make the right decision is far more valuable in so many ways than making the right decision *for* them.

The latter is Apple's philosophy. Kapish?

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: The App-Starter...
by KMDF on Mon 15th Mar 2010 14:30 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: The App-Starter..."
KMDF Member since:
2010-02-17

//"Another crash lost your data? I'm sorry. No, my computer hasn't crashed yet this month - it's Linux." "You *might* have a virus, let's scan and see. No, I don't need to scan my computer, too - it's Linux.//

Funny ... my wife uses XP, and since I set it up properly for her, and gave her maybe three basic tips on using it ... she's never had a crash, nor a virus.

PEBKAC, I'd say, in your case.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: The App-Starter...
by ricegf on Wed 17th Mar 2010 15:40 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: The App-Starter..."
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

Well, bully for you! You set up one computer for one light user, and it didn't get a virus or crash. Woot!

As a computer professional for almost 30 years, I've dealt with tens of thousands of machines, from early Macs, Win1 to 7, Unix and Linux machines from pocket to super, soft and hard real-time embedded systems, and a lot of systems you've probably never even imagined (ever "vulcanize the executable"?).

As pretty much everyone with experience this broad will tell you, early WinXP had some serious issues with stability and with viruses. Here's the summary.

Stability problems were largely due to driver issues (the XP driver model had *serious* design flaws, which is why it was changed for Vista and 7 - GIYF). It had various other issues as well, particularly for heavy users, though most of those were cleared by SP2. One that wasn't cleared until Vista, though, was the astounding ability of Internet-laden malware to install itself silently *for every user of that machine*.

XP's design also made it a haven for malware authors, particularly the bone-headed "feature" that the GUI runs by default as administrator. Intertwining a web browser (!) with the core OS was also a godsend to the script kiddie crowd. And, of course, XP's sheer popularity - remember when they held 92% of the desktop market? - just painted a huge target on every XP machine with Internet connections.

Vista, despite it's poor reception (another post entirely), addressed many of these flaws, and 7 a few more. With extensive work (I have the scars), XP could also be locked down to some extent - but for professional level software to work, you usually needed a bolt-on security solution such as BeyondTrust (again, GIYF). Even then, social attacks are much easier with even SP3 than they need to be.

If all you want is to lightly browse the web, probably your wife's use case (but not mine), then you can probably create a "reasonably safe" original XP install. Of course, there are far better solutions for that simple case, Linux being one of the best.

But to imply, as you have, that XP was immune to viruses and highly stable, and thus anyone with a problem *is* the problem, certainly tells me you had mercifully little experience with the beast!

Windows (XP) is dead. Long live Windows (7)! And up with competition across the board!

Peace.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: The App-Starter...
by mightshade on Wed 17th Mar 2010 18:46 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: The App-Starter..."
mightshade Member since:
2008-11-20

Rather, each time I provided "technical support", I just casually mentioned why I never had that problem. "Another crash lost your data? I'm sorry. No, my computer hasn't crashed yet this month - it's Linux." "You *might* have a virus, let's scan and see. No, I don't need to scan my computer, too - it's Linux."

Is this just your shortened re-telling? I think you did that in a much nicer way in real life.
Because, if you really had done it exactly the way you described, you would've come across as annoying. Perhaps even smug/trollish, you know what I mean. At least that's my experience with the people who thought they needed to "show me the carrot".

Anyway. What I want to add is, if you want to promote alternatives, don't overdo it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: The App-Starter...
by ricegf on Thu 18th Mar 2010 01:29 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: The App-Starter..."
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

Haha, you may be right. I can't tell if I was annoying or not, but my wife didn't complain. Of course, she knows I was born a geek. :-)

I think knowing the person who's seeking your advice helps to guide how you present the idea of software freedom, and avoid the annoyance factor. I definitely agree not overdoing it is rule #1.

Reply Score: 1

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

The locked down defaults are just fine. The problem is criminalizing those users who want to go beyond the basic functions of the device and make use of what the hardware is actually capable of. Again, the example of Nokia comes up with a default limited setting for there Maemo devices and a "red pill" mode for those who choose to go beyond manufacturer's recommendations. Why should advanced users be limited to protect average users?

But it's not just that; the result of unlocking the phones true potential should simply void one's warranty. A basic warning and a yes/no. At worst, it should be a civil case for breach of contract. Apple is trying to include it under DMCA law; this effectively makes it a criminal case to modify your legally purchased device and that is completely insane. No one should be held criminally responsible for breaking into there own possessions. Imagine criminal charges against someone who broke into there own home because they forgot there keys. Apple wants to invoke criminal law for what is at worst, a breach of contract and rationally, a voluntary voiding of one's warranty.

Microsoft has control issues but Apple makes Mr Balmer look like a white night crusading for the good of the consumer.

Reply Score: 4

RE: The App-Starter...
by stabbyjones on Mon 15th Mar 2010 06:42 UTC in reply to "The App-Starter..."
stabbyjones Member since:
2008-04-15

It took you thousands of dollars to Apple to figure that out?

It's not like they haven't always been like this, now it's just more obvious.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: The App-Starter...
by neitileple on Mon 15th Mar 2010 10:48 UTC in reply to "RE: The App-Starter..."
neitileple Member since:
2010-03-14

Yes, unfortunately.... It took me much time to see it, and it turned me into an Apple-hater when I found out...

With OS9 it could seem like it was not there yet, also, the same with OSX. I have absolutely no problems accepting that. Even shortcomings I can accept. With iTunes it was getting very obvious and when finding the truth about iPhone I hated the whole company...

Reply Score: 1

Apple looked too short term
by siki_miki on Sun 14th Mar 2010 20:06 UTC
siki_miki
Member since:
2006-01-17

Apple now lost a chance to create a monopoly in the mobile OS market. They only had to licence it, but were greedy enough to sell it with their own hardware and brand only. History repeats itself, this time it's Google, and I presume lawyers are going to remind of Google-Microsoft lawsuit in the courtroom.

Google stepped in and made a product that handset makers endorsed, and it would have happened without Google, but a year or two later. Even MS is planning something like iPhone OS, but licenseable (they were just happy with WinMo6 share against Symbian and didn't expect the iPhone to fire up the need for improvement). Google anticipated it early and finished Android before other competitors.

I guess Apple were betting to repeat the same dominance as with ipods, though this time they are against very strong mobile phone brands (which were then selling on hw specs mostly and neglecting software quality). Google came as a savior, as a company that understands what OS business is about: good platform.

Now the only chance for Apple against becoming only one of many quality brands is suing everyone.

Reply Score: 8

v it's personal
by darwinOS on Sun 14th Mar 2010 20:33 UTC
It's about marketing reach
by mrhasbean on Sun 14th Mar 2010 21:54 UTC
mrhasbean
Member since:
2006-04-03

Google own the search engine market. That combined with products such as Adsense means they have the ability to put what is effectively free advertising for their products in front of hundreds of millions of people across the world every day, even into iPhone apps. And if you market something to the average user that looks like and iPhone...

Apple do not have that luxury so they will pursue whatever avenue they can to protect their investment, and despite what many want to portray it was and continues to be a sizeable investment. If it was your money invested I'm sure you'd want them to try to protect it, but because it's Apple, and they're a company, and companies are inherently evil according to some, them trying to protect their investment is also inherently evil.

And the only people who think that coming up with a concept and seeing it brought to market doesn't deserves some protection from those who would copy it are those who've never had an original thought in their lives. Anyone who's had an idea stolen only to see someone else make millions from it has a completely different perspective on these things.

Reply Score: 2

RE: It's about marketing reach
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 14th Mar 2010 22:55 UTC in reply to "It's about marketing reach"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Except that the iPhone itself is also built upon the ideas of dozens, if not hundreds, of other people.

The iPhone is a simple touch screen phone, and a relatively limited one at that. It's a good phone, probably the best in the market, but it isn't special. It doesn't contain anything mind-blowingly original. It isn't an "invention". It's a combination of great ideas from other people, but executed better, and in a marketable fashion.

Apple fanatics ridicule Nokia and others, but if it weren't for Nokia, Apple couldn't have built the iPhone. And even if, without Nokia, they'd have been capable of building the iPhone, then the iPhone would not have been a success: Nokia has played a vital role in popularising and spreading the mobile phone around the world, by making phones and the accompanying technology cheap and within reach of everyone.

You can't patent that, so companies like Nokia get no recognition for that at all - yet it is far more impressive than bringing to market an old technology (multitouch) or designing a proper UI (gets done all the time, even by people/companies other than Apple!).

I dislike Nokia for suing Apple, and I dislike Apple for suing HTC. However, Nokia's contributions to the world are far greater than Apple's; Nokia has had and is having an impact on the world itself, allowing people of all wealth levels all around the world to communicate. Nokia contributed to the underlying technology a great deal, while also providing the actual devices. That it a major feat, and if I have to choose between the two, I'd definitely want Nokia to win this one.

Edited 2010-03-14 23:00 UTC

Reply Score: 12

RE[2]: It's about marketing reach
by KMDF on Mon 15th Mar 2010 14:32 UTC in reply to "RE: It's about marketing reach"
KMDF Member since:
2010-02-17

//he iPhone is a simple touch screen phone, and a relatively limited one at that. It's a good phone, probably the best in the market, but it isn't special. It doesn't contain anything mind-blowingly original.//

But wasn't it original and kind of "mind-blowing' when it came out? I can't recall another phone at the time that looked as good, had the "touch UI," and was as easy to use.

(and I don't, nor have I ever, owned an iPhone).

Just a thought.

Edited 2010-03-15 14:33 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

But wasn't it original and kind of "mind-blowing' when it came out? I can't recall another phone at the time that looked as good, had the "touch UI," and was as easy to use.


With the right followers on Twitter, I can make the turd I churned out this morning become mind-blowing.

Looking good is not innovation or special. Heck, there have been countless phones in history that look a million times better than the iPhone (the 8800 is still my favourite - I had one, too).

http://stores.voyco.com/catalog/nokia_8800.jpg

Touch UI isn't special either. Touch UIs, in fact, are older than god.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: It's about marketing reach
by Bounty on Mon 15th Mar 2010 16:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: It's about marketing reach"
Bounty Member since:
2006-09-18

//he iPhone is a simple touch screen phone, and a relatively limited one at that. It's a good phone, probably the best in the market, but it isn't special. It doesn't contain anything mind-blowingly original.// But wasn't it original and kind of "mind-blowing' when it came out? I can't recall another phone at the time that looked as good, had the "touch UI," and was as easy to use. (and I don't, nor have I ever, owned an iPhone). Just a thought.


Multiple smartphones had touch screens 5 years before the iPhone cried it's first breath? The main innovation Apple had was to market it as a trendy housewife phone instead of to businesmen.

Reply Score: 3

RE: It's about marketing reach
by Soulbender on Mon 15th Mar 2010 02:50 UTC in reply to "It's about marketing reach"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Anyone who's had an idea stolen only to see someone else make millions from it has a completely different perspective on these things.


Why don't we ask any of those many people that Apple has (by Jobs own admission) stolen ideas from.

Reply Score: 4

RE: It's about marketing reach
by lemur2 on Mon 15th Mar 2010 02:54 UTC in reply to "It's about marketing reach"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Anyone who's had an idea stolen only to see someone else make millions from it has a completely different perspective on these things.


No-one can steal mathematics, because it is already public property. The ideas of mathematics have been public property for over a thousand years.

Software is mathematics.

Here is an example of an algorithm within a computing device that is about two thousand years old:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism

http://amog.com/tech/decoding-ancient-computernew-astonishing-truth...

Edited 2010-03-15 03:04 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: It's about marketing reach
by Soulbender on Mon 15th Mar 2010 03:33 UTC in reply to "It's about marketing reach"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Anyone who's had an idea stolen only to see someone else make millions from it has a completely different perspective on these things.


Also, and many (including the USPTO) seems not to know this, you can't patent ideas. This is why you can't patent the idea of a painkiller, only the specific ways that makes up one possible painkiller. This is also why you can't patent multi-touch in itself, only a specific implementation of it.

Reply Score: 2

RE: It's about marketing reach
by ricegf on Mon 15th Mar 2010 13:56 UTC in reply to "It's about marketing reach"
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

Palm invented (and patented) many of the iPhone's basic operating concepts while creating the inimitable Treo. That's one reason why, when Jobs first threatened to sue Palm over WebOS and they responded with brilliant understatement, "We have a few patents, too", Apple backed down. (Another, of course, is that WebOS hasn't taken off in the way that Android has.)

Apple is on thin ice here. If Palm gets desperate and sues Apple over the iPhone, coupled with Nokia's existing patents suits for their extensive holdings based on Symbian, Apple could lose more in the courts than they would ever have lost in the marketplace.

Wouldn't an iPhone 2 with decent screen resolution, microSD support, a removable battery, and multitasking been a better investment than a lawsuit?

Reply Score: 3

Product Quality
by jimmystewpot on Sun 14th Mar 2010 22:32 UTC
jimmystewpot
Member since:
2006-01-19

I am finding the Apple law suites really interesting. I don't believe that all of the patents that are being referenced by Apple as being valid. However there are many which can easily by passed with alternative's which are just as east if not easier to use. There are others which can be seen as a true innovation and therefore should be patentable. The key here is that apple expects everyone to play by their rules when the reality is that they live in a very strange place... The rules that apple play by are extreme and controlling and often contradictory to technology advancement... There are so many patents which they don't license to people to develop further and enhance the usage.. If the whole industry played like this would we all be at the 'technological' level that we are today? Could you imagine a world if Xerox or whoever it was that invented the GUI didn't license it? it would be very different to what we have today.

I believe passionately in the need for patents to be licensed so that we can all grow and improve.

I am by no means a fan of google, but I really appreciate their products and their open API's. It makes developing tools and so on so much easier. I think that is one of the big differentiators between google and many of their competitors in that they understand the need to integrate even if you have to do it on their terms. This is a fundamental difference with apple who rarely integrate anything openly.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Product Quality
by lemur2 on Mon 15th Mar 2010 02:44 UTC in reply to "Product Quality"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I believe passionately in the need for patents to be licensed so that we can all grow and improve.


I believe passionately in the need for software patents to be scrapped so that we can all grow and improve.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Product Quality
by flanque on Mon 15th Mar 2010 11:53 UTC in reply to "RE: Product Quality"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

I believe passionately in the need for software patents to be scrapped so that we can all grow and improve.

I believe passionately in the need to grow and improve to make something better, then license it to Apple.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Product Quality
by lemur2 on Mon 15th Mar 2010 12:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Product Quality"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"I believe passionately in the need for software patents to be scrapped so that we can all grow and improve.

I believe passionately in the need to grow and improve to make something better, then license it to Apple.
"

Just like Opera Software, perhaps?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/03/12/sxsw.iphone.opera/index.html

Good luck with that, both to you and Opera Software.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Product Quality
by flanque on Mon 15th Mar 2010 12:08 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Product Quality"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

It was a joke...

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Product Quality
by lemur2 on Mon 15th Mar 2010 13:49 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Product Quality"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

It was a joke...


Sorry. I get very humor-impaired when it comes to big business trying make it so that no other supplier can compete against them, and wanting to rip people off.

My joke detector is completely non-functional around topics of that ilk.

Reply Score: 2

Sidenote
by toast88 on Sun 14th Mar 2010 23:34 UTC
toast88
Member since:
2009-09-23

Just a funny sidenote:

Apple, as much as they pretend to hate Google, I bet that, again this year, MacPorts an Apple-owned project has applied to Google Summer of Code.

Like they did last year:

http://trac.macports.org/wiki/SummerOfCode

Irony!

Apple knows that they are going downhill now and they are fearing that they, again, will loose a market to the competition like what happened with Windows back in the 90ies. The dog got bitten, now it's starting to bark.

I don't think that Apple has any serious chances to win this battle, the competition is just too overwhelming. It's not just Google, but most of the big players on the cell phone market plus the whole open source and Linux community. Seriously, those are way too many companies and organizations to sue. And, if Apple was a bit more clear-sighted now, they knew that all their patent-claims are mere Troll-patents which are actually only really accepted as patents in the US with it's questionable patent system. As opposed to Apple, the patents claimed by Nokia cover really some kind of important cell phone technologies like GSM, UMTS and so on while Apple's stuff covers only things like "Unlocking a phone by wiping over the touch screen".

Beware Apple, it's a fight you will never be able to win! Better withdraw and allow some competition on the market.

Adrian

Reply Score: 4

so if i understand it right...
by Bully on Mon 15th Mar 2010 00:30 UTC
Bully
Member since:
2006-04-07

Apple wants to be the only one that is allowed to make smartphones?

Reply Score: 5

Piot
Member since:
2009-09-17

You guys should have a field day!


7,0829,490 Identifying navigation bars and objectionable navigation bars

D521,193 Graphical user interface for a display screen of a communications terminal

D533,561 Graphical user interface

D533,834 Graphical user interface for a display screen

D541,193 Display device showing user interface

D550,359 Graphic user interface of page turning elements for a display screen of a communications terminal

7,426,682 Electronic messages with embedded musical note emoticons

7,466,735 Systems and methods for using image duplicates to assign labels to images

7,356,894 Methods and systems for requesting and providing information in a social network

7,485,447 Web page zoom feature

7,395,017 Assessing wireless network quality

7,495,996 Systems and methods for detecting a memory condition and providing an alert

Reply Score: 2

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Damn, all those patents look like they're either for the 'damn obvious' or worse, they're already extensively used prior to the release of the iPhone. If anything, this case justifies the dire need for something to be done about the existing patent system because right now it is crippling innovation as everyone is cared that some dick will start suing thus causing a chain reaction.

I swear if I had 5 minutes with Steve I'd tell him to get over himself and go back to making great products instead of whining about the competition; If the Apple brand is as strong as many analysts and Steve claims it is then it should easily withstand a few cloners out there - after all, people are willing to pay for the brand even in the light of cheap knock offs.

Reply Score: 4

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Just... Wow. I don't know what makes me cringe harder; that Apple actually patented this bullshit, or that the USPTO actually gave them out.

They patented zooming in on a web page. Holy crap, this means that everytime I move my head closer to my display, I'm infringing upon Apple's patents. What the fcuk.

Where did you get this info from?

Reply Score: 3

tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

You guys should have a field day!


70829490 Identifying navigation bars and objectionable navigation bars Results of Search in US Patents Collection db for:
70829490: 0 patents.


D521193 Graphical user interface for a display screen of a communications terminal Lombard; Nancy (Solana Beach, CA)

D533561 Graphical user interface Google, Inc. (Mountain View, CA)

D533834 Graphical user interface for a display screen Cisco Technology, Inc. (San Jose, CA)

D541193 Display device showing user interface ZefTek, Inc. (Montgomery, IL)

D550359 Graphic user interface of page turning elements for a display screen of a communications terminal Toshiba Medical Systems Corporation (JP)

7426682 Electronic messages with embedded musical note emoticons Via Technologies, Inc. (Taipei, TW)

7466735 Systems and methods for using image duplicates to assign labels to images Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd. (Kanagawa-ken, JP)

7356894 Methods and systems for requesting and providing information in a social network Fujitsu Limited (Kawasaki, JP)

7485447 Web page zoom feature Novozymes A/S (Bagsvaerd, DK)

7395017 Assessing wireless network quality Oki Data Corporation (Tokyo, JP)

7495996 Systems and methods for detecting a memory condition and providing an alert Lockheed Martin Corporation (Bethesda, MD)


Plug in the number here: http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm

Really? So far every patent number I've checked has nothing to do with Apple Patents.

Not one of your descriptions matches the Patent Number Description after checking.

What's the intent here?

Reply Score: 3

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Good work. I only have my iPhone on me at the moment, so I can't check the numbers easily yet (hence me asking for a source). It seems like we've been trolled?

Reply Score: 0

tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

Good work. I only have my iPhone on me at the moment, so I can't check the numbers easily yet (hence me asking for a source). It seems like we've been trolled?


No problem. However it is truly sad you get voted down on your own site for just being earnest.

Reply Score: 2

uteck Member since:
2006-07-16

Here is link to Engaget that has a better list of the patents Apple is listing.

http://i.engadget.com/2010/03/02/apple-vs-htc-a-patent-breakdown/

Reply Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

They may look silly but to really know if they are silly or not you will have to actually read what methods they patent.

Reply Score: 2

Apple's HTC patent lawsuit is a bluff
by quackalist on Mon 15th Mar 2010 07:03 UTC
quackalist
Member since:
2007-08-27

Apple's HTC patent lawsuit is a bluff

http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Apples-HTC-patent-lawsuit...

Seems to sum it up nicely;but, however, I can't get my head around why anyone would spend so much on a phone so that probably colours my outlook.

Edited 2010-03-15 07:04 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Oh, well...
by Neolander on Mon 15th Mar 2010 08:42 UTC
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

If it's only about Steve Jobs being a little more dictatorial than usual, it's fine. All human beings are equal facing death. He's 55, got some serious health problems in the past, I bet he's not going over 80. It may sound creepy, but I'm really waiting for him to die.

Apple's story is strongly linked to that of Jobs. He's a man who's good at doing management, he finds good engineers and makes them work together. He's the sole man in Apple history who did that properly. But when he gets into engineering, his ideas are horrible.

Trying to convince Wozniak that the Apple II should not be offered much expandability capabilities ? Jobs.
Making pixel-perfect copy of Xerox's work in the Lisa, then destroying the initially innovative Macintosh project in order to make a Lisa clone after being fired from the Lisa team ? Jobs.
Making computers bundled with monitors so that when one of them fails one has to replace both ? Jobs.
Making the Apple III an unreliable machine by pushing unrealistic engineering ideas ? Jobs.
Forcing iPod users to deal with a media player and a USB/FW cable sold under a 40€ price tag in order to transfer data (WTF ?) ? Jobs.
Forcing people wanting Apple software to buy proprietary hardware (like those horrible multitouch trackpads which often get confused between zooming gestures and panning gestures when doing word processing) ? Jobs.
App store licensing terms, App store-only model ? Jobs.

At least it's what it sounds like when reading through Apple's history. I'm not yet perfectly sure of it. So when he dies, I'll carefully watch his successor's actions. Then I'll know if Apple in intrinsically evil or if, as I think, it's a bunch of good engineers governed by a horrible CEO.

And, in the latter case, I might get out of linux non-standardization hell and buy some Apple hardware or software then, provided that its successor removes all stupid limitations ;)

Edited 2010-03-15 08:49 UTC

Reply Score: 7

I know
by Neolander on Mon 15th Mar 2010 08:51 UTC
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

I think it's about showing to pro-patents people that software patents are often vague and hence extremely dangerous.

Reply Score: 1

a war too far
by alcibiades on Mon 15th Mar 2010 10:28 UTC
alcibiades
Member since:
2005-10-12

Problem is, its a war they cannot win, and even if they did win, it would not gain them what they want. It is doubly pointless. But something like this was always going to happen, its called hubris. Those who the Gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.

Reply Score: 3

Remember Ballmer Throwing a chair?
by adinas on Mon 15th Mar 2010 11:28 UTC
adinas
Member since:
2005-08-17

Remember when Steve Ballmer went totally nuts over Google, started throwing chairs and threatening with bodily harm? I wonder what Microsoft thinks of this? Their two big enemies, Google and Apple beating each up. hehe.

Edited 2010-03-15 11:29 UTC

Reply Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Remember when Steve Ballmer went totally nuts over Google, started throwing chairs and threatening with bodily harm? I wonder what Microsoft thinks of this? Their two big enemies, Google and Apple beating each up. hehe.


AFAIK Microsoft own shares in Apple.

Edited 2010-03-15 12:06 UTC

Reply Score: 2

FealDorf Member since:
2008-01-07

If I remember correctly, they sold those shares away within an year of buying them or so...

Reply Score: 1

tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

If I remember correctly, they sold those shares away within an year of buying them or so...


You're correct. They sold their $150 Million investment the moment they met the criteria of their agreement.

Reply Score: 2

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

"Remember when Steve Ballmer went totally nuts over Google, started throwing chairs and threatening with bodily harm? I wonder what Microsoft thinks of this? Their two big enemies, Google and Apple beating each up. hehe.


AFAIK Microsoft own shares in Apple.
"

No, they sold them years ago.

Reply Score: 2

The patent lawsuit is a bluff
by tomcat on Tue 16th Mar 2010 02:33 UTC
tomcat
Member since:
2006-01-06

I'm going to have to agree with the previously linked article: the lawsuit is indeed a bluff. Apple is challenging too many players in this market. Nokia, Palm, Microsoft, and others have more combined patents than Apple, and it can't hope to prevail based on IP alone. No, this is about slowing down Android adoption. Not sure if everyone heard this, but iPhone market share stalled and even declined last month, compared to Android. I'm looking forward to seeing market share numbers this month and next month. I'm betting that Android (and eventually Windows Phone 7) are going to start cutting deeply into Apple's market share. Which is phenomenal news for the market: It means that competition is alive and vibrant, and we'll be the beneficiaries.

Reply Score: 3

RE: The patent lawsuit is a bluff
by Soulbender on Tue 16th Mar 2010 10:34 UTC in reply to "The patent lawsuit is a bluff"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Sigh. I'd mod you up but alas, since I had an opinion earlier I'm not trusted to have a balanced view.

Reply Score: 2

Angst
by elsewhere on Wed 17th Mar 2010 05:17 UTC
elsewhere
Member since:
2005-07-13

I'm a contented iPhone user. I bought a 3G when it was released in Canada, and then upgraded to a 3GS a few months later when it was released. That upgrade is one advantage I think Apple has; I don't know what deal-with-the-devil they managed with my provider (Rogers), but I was able to upgrade to a 3GS at a lower price than when I upgraded to the 3G 9 months earlier. I fully expect to be able to upgrade to whatever the hell Apple releases this summer, as well.

However, Google today released an N1 that is compatible with the Canadian networks (ok, compatible with AT&T, but the Canadian compatibility is a bonus). So I just ordered one. I don't like the direction Apple is taking with the lawsuit BS, and I frequently suffer from gadget lust, so I bit the bullet. We'll see how it is; I already know that it is broken when it comes to Exchange support (score a big one for the iPhone there), and I know I'm going to have to shell out money for a third-party app just to handle my corporate email, but I'll suck that up. I'll play with the N1, but keep my options open when the next iPhone comes out.

The real issue I'm wrestling with here is that Apple and Google are basically the two biggest companies in the industry that repulse me the most with their tactics and intents, yet I'm throwing money at both for a taste of their candy when it comes to a smart phone. That, I think, is the issue. I can come up with about a billion reasons why Apple sucks, but I love my iPhone. I can think of about a billion reasons why Google scares me, but I want to love their phone more than my iPhone.

What happened Nokia? How did you fall so far from grace? I loved my 3650, I'm convinced the 3600 series was the pre-cursor to the iPhone by almost a decade. I loved my 6800, my 6820, my 9300, my 8300, my E61, my E62. And then the iPhone came out and changed the game. Ok, they shook things up, but what's taking so long?

I really want a credible alternative to a phone provided by either Apple or Google, but until that happens, I won't hesitate to throw money at them for the latest and greatest.

I feel dirty, but whatever, the competition really needs to catch up.

Reply Score: 2