Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 19th Sep 2012 21:40 UTC
Legal "The International Trade Commission voted yesterday to investigate Apple for patent infringement allegations launched by the Google-owned Motorola Mobility. As expected, Motorola is asking for import bans on just about every iOS device, including iPhones, iPods, and iPads. What might be surprising is that Motorola is also asking for a ban on every type of Mac OS X computer, claiming Apple's iMessage technology infringes a Motorola patent." Let's hope all those products get banned. And that all Motorola phones get banned. Let's hope everything gets banned from the US. And yes, I changed Motorola into Google for the headline.
Thread beginning with comment 535907
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Bravo!
by StephenBeDoper on Fri 21st Sep 2012 01:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Bravo!"
StephenBeDoper
Member since:
2005-07-06

Very interesting comment, and clearly one that had a lot of thought put into it. And I agree with just about everything in it, up until this point:

But when it came time to produce a product, they cheated. They scrambled to copy from more established players. Originally it was going to be Blackberry, because that's what a data-heavy device looked like when Google started making prototypes, but they changed course at the first sight of iPhone.


Strip that paragraph of all the emotionally-loaded phrasing & implied value judgements, and you basically have a textbook description of how any responsibly-run business would act when entering a new market.

If if a supermarket chain creates their own version of a preexisting "brand" product, do you consider that to be a cheat? It's generally not seen that way - and whatever else one can say about Android, it's clearly more than just a store brand knock-off of iOS.

My point is to stop painting Google as an innocent philanthropist who was minding its own business when big bully Apple came along and stole all its toys. If Google had done something original in Android instead of copying Java and iOS, these lawsuits wouldn't be happening, just as they're not happening to WebOS or WP7 -- and Google is still coming out ahead despite the law's attempts to stop this sort of thing.


WP7, maybe. But webOS? Speaking as someone who owns a Pre 2, an iPod touch, and a few and Android device, webOS is a HELL of a lot more iOS-like than any implementation of Android I've ever encountered. Not that I think that's a bad thing - the developers of webOS obviously looked at iOS for inspiration, AND (more importantly) looked for ways they could improve on it. That is, I'd argue, exactly the same way that most innovation occurs - by taking something that already exists & improving on it. That's also same approach that Apple themselves used when entering the smartphone market.

If anything, one of my pet peeves about Android is that the primary goal of many design decisions seems to have been "do it differently than iOS" (instead of "do it in whatever way works best"). So I do find it odd to see Android constantly painted at some kind of exact 1:1 clone of iOS.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Bravo!
by bentoo on Fri 21st Sep 2012 16:55 in reply to "RE[2]: Bravo!"
bentoo Member since:
2012-09-21

...But webOS? Speaking as someone who owns a Pre 2, an iPod touch, and a few and Android device, webOS is a HELL of a lot more iOS-like than any implementation of Android I've ever encountered. Not that I think that's a bad thing - the developers of webOS obviously looked at iOS for inspiration


Or more likely Palm OS. Really the only thing I can think of that webOS and iOS have in common is the static icon grid application launcher.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Bravo!
by StephenBeDoper on Fri 21st Sep 2012 17:38 in reply to "RE[3]: Bravo!"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

"...But webOS? Speaking as someone who owns a Pre 2, an iPod touch, and a few and Android device, webOS is a HELL of a lot more iOS-like than any implementation of Android I've ever encountered. Not that I think that's a bad thing - the developers of webOS obviously looked at iOS for inspiration


Or more likely Palm OS.
"

That's a separate topic, but I do think it's a little more complex than that. Rather, it's probably a case of iOS taking inspiration from PalmOS, and webOS in turn taking inspiration from iOS.

Really the only thing I can think of that webOS and iOS have in common is the static icon grid application launcher.


Off the top of my head, webOS possesses two of the exact same features that Apple has sued Android handset makers over: webOS has had both "pinch to zoom" and "bounceback" since day one, IIRC. And in terms of basic look-and-feel, webOS and iOS are more similar to each other than either is to Android - this article is a bit old, but it has a nice side-by-side screenshot (under "Native Input Controls"):

http://uxdesign.smashingmagazine.com/2010/03/11/forms-on-mobile-dev...

Which was my original point - or, rather, counter-point to the GP's claim that webOS doesn't/didn't possess the features that were the subject of the Apple-Samsung lawsuit (and others). Note that I'm not attempting to criticize webOS and/or claim that it's a ripoff of iOS (either explicitly or implicitly).

Simply put, my point is that there's obviously more to the Apple lawsuits than the mere existence of those features in certain Android implementations - as evidenced by the fact that those features existing in other mobile platforms, which have not been the subject of legal action by Apple.

Reply Parent Score: 2