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.
Thread beginning with comment 413683
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
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 Parent Score: 12

RE[2]: It's about marketing reach
by KMDF on Mon 15th Mar 2010 14:32 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 Parent 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 Parent Score: 2

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 Parent Score: 3