dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
3071
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd to Robert

Premium Member

to Robert

Re: We've passed Peak Apple....

said by Robert:

At least for me, while I like my iPhone, I'm turned off my Apple's continue lawsuits. What happened with winning through competition, and not through lawsuits?

They realized they could not maintain the lead they once had. Naturally they bust out the lawsuits. Sad state of business but that seems to be how portable computing works today, Can't beat em then sue em.
Daemon
Premium Member
join:2003-06-29
Washington, DC

1 recommendation

Daemon to 67845017

Premium Member

to 67845017
said by 67845017:

Fanboys will always be fanboys and suck up Apple stuff. But for those with a more discerning opinion, as long as Apple behaves like it's magical shit they're producing, people will call them on it when it isn't.

People make a big deal about glitches from all manufacturers. It's only amplified because Apple first denies and then has to come to terms with the fallout. Again, if you're promising magic and you're not delivering, you'll get called on it. No matter the company--don't think it's because Apple is so fantastic. It's just that non-Apple people are more than willing to throw their tech providers under the bus for messing up even in little ways. Whereas Apple fanboys don't want to admit that the product is, just possibly, not living up to the magical standards. It reminds me of the Emperor's New Clothes story.

Can you provide a couple of comparable anecdotes that support your opinion? It seems to me that glitches in Apple products get over-hyped by the tech press because they drive page views.

For example, the Nexus 4 doesn't have LTE. Google said that it wasn't possible to do it due to the variety of carriers. Did that story gain any traction? Not that I saw--only the verge wrote about it. But, many wrote about how the iPhone 4S was going to be a failure because it didn't have LTE.
Daemon

Daemon to Kearnstd

Premium Member

to Kearnstd
said by Kearnstd:

They realized they could not maintain the lead they once had. Naturally they bust out the lawsuits. Sad state of business but that seems to be how portable computing works today, Can't beat em then sue em.

Or, perhaps, they felt that many Android features were a direct rip-off of iOS features and wanted them to stop. Apple hasn't sued Microsoft, Nokia, Amazon, or Barnes and Noble. They didn't go after Palm when it was around either.

(I predict the inevitable responses to this post will be something about patenting rounded rectangles and that software patents are bogus.)
67845017 (banned)
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL

67845017 (banned)

Member

It's because Google is eventually going to eat their lunch and they can see it coming.

The only reason the tech rags rag on Apple is to see the reaction from the iFans. Again, it's from Apple acting like they have these magical devices.

I have to quit this thread before I get banned. The fanboyism is making me ill.

Count Zero
Premium Member
join:2007-01-18
Milton, FL

Count Zero to Brendan

Premium Member

to Brendan
It's back up over $11 today.
SHOtime
join:2001-12-04
Bedford, IN

SHOtime to djrobx

Member

to djrobx
I didn't propose that it was something new. Apple lives on their reputation. They expect you to pay more for what they tell you is a better product. Their "it just works" mantra and continually claiming everyone else is cutting corners to compete is stretching the truth at best, an outright lie at worst.

Hardware wise they are no longer the leader. There are a number of devices with as good or better specs than the Iphone and Ipad. In regards to the UI both Android and MS have both caught up and in may ways surpassed iOS. The casual user would have a hard time distingushing a difference in the App stores of either Apple or Android. The biggest apps reside in both. A few more fart apps in the App store a few less smaller game titles on the Play Store. It's truly a wash at this point.

They seem to be a company (not unlike MS at its peak) content to rest on their prior achievements. Incremental updates to the OS with no real changes. The difference between MS and Apple is that MS did not have a real challenger in the PC OS battle. Apple was a niche. Apple is faced with the real possibility of becoming the 3rd player in mobile technology behind both MS and Google. Android has already passed them in marketshare and with MS built in base of PC users, Enterprise IT, and a generation of XBOX gamers Win8 cannot be taken lightly.
Daemon
Premium Member
join:2003-06-29
Washington, DC

1 edit

Daemon to 67845017

Premium Member

to 67845017
Upon reflection I do not wish to post.

digitalfutur
Sees More Than Shown
Premium Member
join:2000-07-15
GTA

digitalfutur to ptrowski

Premium Member

to ptrowski
A decline in market share is inevitable when a company starts at over 80% a few months after a new product introduction.

What is not inevitable is a company taking its customers for granted, as Apple has started doing by expecting them to buy a updated product once a year or more often. As a result, Apple's tablet market share is down to 50% and its smartphone market share is down to 17%. And being lawsuit-happy is a signal to competitors that Apple is starting to run out of ideas, and further emboldens Samsung and others to "core the Apple".

Apples Achille's heel is overdependence on a shiny new apple in a market where apples have been commoditized.

Metatron2008
You're it
Premium Member
join:2008-09-02
united state

Metatron2008 to Daemon

Premium Member

to Daemon
said by Daemon:

Or, perhaps, they felt that many Android features were a direct rip-off of iOS features and wanted them to stop.

Oh really? An OS made with a Linux core (Android) shares features like an OS made from a UNIX core (iOS)? When does an OS not share features?
quote:
Apple hasn't sued Microsoft
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ap ··· poration

The court ruled that, "Apple cannot get patent-like protection for the idea of a graphical user interface, or the idea of a desktop metaphor [under copyright law]..."[1] In the midst of the Apple v. Microsoft lawsuit, Xerox also sued Apple alleging that Mac's GUI was heavily based on Xerox's.
quote:
Nokia
»news.cnet.com/8301-13579 ··· -37.html

Apple sues Nokia over iPhone scrolling patent
quote:
Amazon
»www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/we ··· dex.html

Apple sues Amazon over 'app store' name
quote:
or Barnes and Noble
You actually got one right. Microsoft sued Barnes and Noble.

Apple has a long history of making good devices and then acting like it invented the entire market. You wanna also say that Apple invented the term App store?

Did apple also invent the apple? Is that why they suing poland grocery stores for having an apple logo?

»www.webpronews.com/apple ··· -2012-09

sgarrand
Insert Witty Phrase Here
Premium Member
join:2000-04-13
West Brookfield, MA

sgarrand to Teasip

Premium Member

to Teasip
said by Teasip:

I'm still on the 3G 8GB phone, out of contract, and have been ready to upgrade (as well as the wife who has the same phone). I've never had an Android but the Samsung Galaxy III on the television commercials have caught my eye. Opinions?

I went from multiple iPhones (1st, 3G, 3GS) to Android and I currently own a Samsung Galaxy S III. I admire iOS for what it does well but it no longer meets my needs. Everyone's needs are different.

Scott

Teasip
join:2001-05-14
Plano, TX

Teasip

Member

Thanks. For the mess that I went through today (posted in a separate thread) it looks like the Samsung may not be a bad option. I've got to perform a little research on it's ability to interact with OS X first.

sk1939
Premium Member
join:2010-10-23
Frederick, MD
ARRIS SB8200
Ubiquiti UDM-Pro
Juniper SRX320

sk1939 to Metatron2008

Premium Member

to Metatron2008
said by Metatron2008:

said by Daemon:

Or, perhaps, they felt that many Android features were a direct rip-off of iOS features and wanted them to stop.

Oh really? An OS made with a Linux core (Android) shares features like an OS made from a UNIX core (iOS)? When does an OS not share features?
quote:
Apple hasn't sued Microsoft
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ap ··· poration

The court ruled that, "Apple cannot get patent-like protection for the idea of a graphical user interface, or the idea of a desktop metaphor [under copyright law]..."[1] In the midst of the Apple v. Microsoft lawsuit, Xerox also sued Apple alleging that Mac's GUI was heavily based on Xerox's.
quote:
Nokia
»news.cnet.com/8301-13579 ··· -37.html

Apple sues Nokia over iPhone scrolling patent
quote:
Amazon
»www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/we ··· dex.html

Apple sues Amazon over 'app store' name
quote:
or Barnes and Noble
You actually got one right. Microsoft sued Barnes and Noble.

Apple has a long history of making good devices and then acting like it invented the entire market. You wanna also say that Apple invented the term App store?

Did apple also invent the apple? Is that why they suing poland grocery stores for having an apple logo?

»www.webpronews.com/apple ··· -2012-09

The lawsuits are an interesting issue. Apple also sued Samsung (now infamously) over the design of the iPhone (literally rectangle with rounded edges and a prominent screen).

sgarrand
Insert Witty Phrase Here
Premium Member
join:2000-04-13
West Brookfield, MA

sgarrand to Teasip

Premium Member

to Teasip
If there's anything specific, I have a 2011 iMac and I could help. Drop me an IM if you need something.

Scott
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd to Daemon

Premium Member

to Daemon
said by Daemon:

Or, perhaps, they felt that many Android features were a direct rip-off of iOS features and wanted them to stop. Apple hasn't sued Microsoft, Nokia, Amazon, or Barnes and Noble. They didn't go after Palm when it was around either.

Maybe maybe not. But Apple's patents are like saying Blizzard should be able to patent "The use of Elves in a fantasy MMORPG setting."

Or Lucas Film being able to patent triangle shaped space ships for use in science fiction and then suing whoever holds the current rights to Asteroids.

ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT

ptrowski to sk1939

Premium Member

to sk1939
But yet Apple blatantly stole the clock design in iOS 6 and were caught.
Daemon
Premium Member
join:2003-06-29
Washington, DC

2 edits

Daemon to Metatron2008

Premium Member

to Metatron2008
said by Metatron2008:

You actually got one right. Microsoft sued Barnes and Noble.

Apple has a long history of making good devices and then acting like it invented the entire market. You wanna also say that Apple invented the term App store?

I was talking about patents and mobile operating systems, not lawsuits from decades ago or those involving trademarks (which operate completely differently--if you don't sue on a trademark, you lose it by default). So you got me on the Nokia one, but the rest are not relevant in this context.

Stating Android v iOS is about Linux vs Unix is a little silly. The core is not where the controversies arise--nearly all of the lawsuits have been about interfaces not about core feature implementations. Some of them have been algorithmic, but none have involved the actual kernel of the operating system that I am aware of. (The only 'core' lawsuit I can think of is Oracle vs Google re:Android APIs)

And not all OSes share UI features. Apple likes to use Windows Phone as an example of how you can do things in a different enough way that you don't infringe, while still making a device that does all the things users want.

sk1939
Premium Member
join:2010-10-23
Frederick, MD
ARRIS SB8200
Ubiquiti UDM-Pro
Juniper SRX320

sk1939

Premium Member

Windows Phone also benefits from the fact that it isn't a strong competitor to Apple unlike Android.

As far as patents go, Apple holds a number of patents that are overly broad, and can claim patent infringement on a wide variety of things. Apple also has a tendency to claim it invented things (debatable) when in reality they just improved on existing technology (the Mp3 player was along well before the iPod was out).
Daemon
Premium Member
join:2003-06-29
Washington, DC

Daemon

Premium Member

said by sk1939:

As far as patents go, Apple holds a number of patents that are overly broad, and can claim patent infringement on a wide variety of things.

Given that companies have a fiduciary duty to shareholders, anyone that thinks Apple wouldn't or shouldn't patent what they do has his or her head in the clouds. If you don't like the patents because you think they are overly broad, then you should take up the fight against the federal circuit and supreme courts, not Apple. The federal circuit in particular has become problematic.

If you look at the history of the way Android was developed and combine that with the emails that came out during the Oracle trial, it's clear those at the top chose to ignore potential IP problems, whether willfully or naively. It's biting them in the rear now. Microsoft is too smart, with too long of a history, to let that happen to them, instead choosing to cross license with Apple to get patents they could and modify the UI of WP otherwise.

In the history of the litigation over mobile UI patents, Apple has tried to bring out big guns that cover large parts of multi touch interfaces and have quickly and frequently found that those patents don't hold up to closer scrutiny and claims get tossed out. Instead, they are now using patents on very specific features of iOS, like the over scroll physics. The lawsuit against Samsung, once all the claims on both sides were narrowed, really came down to 'don't make your phones look just like ours' and 'don't copy our OS down to minute details'.

Jimothy
@mycingular.net

Jimothy to ptrowski

Anon

to ptrowski
said by ptrowski:

But yet Apple blatantly stole the clock design in iOS 6 and were caught.

patents and trademarks are not the same thing and the vast vast vast majority of timepiece dial designs are not protected under anything, there's a reason you can find 5 bajillion perfectly legal submariner homages and their isn't a single thing Rolex can do outside of their protected crown logo and name

sk1939
Premium Member
join:2010-10-23
Frederick, MD
ARRIS SB8200
Ubiquiti UDM-Pro
Juniper SRX320

sk1939 to Daemon

Premium Member

to Daemon
said by Daemon:

said by sk1939:

As far as patents go, Apple holds a number of patents that are overly broad, and can claim patent infringement on a wide variety of things.

Given that companies have a fiduciary duty to shareholders, anyone that thinks Apple wouldn't or shouldn't patent what they do has his or her head in the clouds. If you don't like the patents because you think they are overly broad, then you should take up the fight against the federal circuit and supreme courts, not Apple. The federal circuit in particular has become problematic.

If you look at the history of the way Android was developed and combine that with the emails that came out during the Oracle trial, it's clear those at the top chose to ignore potential IP problems, whether willfully or naively. It's biting them in the rear now. Microsoft is too smart, with too long of a history, to let that happen to them, instead choosing to cross license with Apple to get patents they could and modify the UI of WP otherwise.

In the history of the litigation over mobile UI patents, Apple has tried to bring out big guns that cover large parts of multi touch interfaces and have quickly and frequently found that those patents don't hold up to closer scrutiny and claims get tossed out. Instead, they are now using patents on very specific features of iOS, like the over scroll physics. The lawsuit against Samsung, once all the claims on both sides were narrowed, really came down to 'don't make your phones look just like ours' and 'don't copy our OS down to minute details'.

I do hold the court/patent system responsible, but I hold the companies socially responsible for doing something they know is questionable.

I agree that in Samsungs case it was a case where the phones were similar, but it was not necessarily the case with the lawsuit against HTC. The question as far as looks go is how similar/different does a design have to be to not be "close" or a copy of Apple's design. That is the problem with the court case as they have not defined the boundary for such a broad design patent.
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd to ptrowski

Premium Member

to ptrowski
The optimal solution is to gut the patent system and only allow patents on physical things. the fact people can patent "Look and Feel" of things is a big problem and does hold back technology.

With physical things patents are usually very specific. A new type of garage door opener has to be pretty detailed in its patent.

ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT

ptrowski to Jimothy

Premium Member

to Jimothy
said by Jimothy :

said by ptrowski:

But yet Apple blatantly stole the clock design in iOS 6 and were caught.

patents and trademarks are not the same thing and the vast vast vast majority of timepiece dial designs are not protected under anything, there's a reason you can find 5 bajillion perfectly legal submariner homages and their isn't a single thing Rolex can do outside of their protected crown logo and name

Right, so that is why apple coughed up $21 million to use it? Nice try.
»www.slashgear.com/apple- ··· 2256573/
Daemon
Premium Member
join:2003-06-29
Washington, DC

Daemon to sk1939

Premium Member

to sk1939
said by sk1939:

I agree that in Samsungs case it was a case where the phones were similar, but it was not necessarily the case with the lawsuit against HTC. The question as far as looks go is how similar/different does a design have to be to not be "close" or a copy of Apple's design. That is the problem with the court case as they have not defined the boundary for such a broad design patent.

To the best of my knowledge, Apple didn't assert any design patents against HTC, so none of that case was about how HTC's phones looked.

sk1939
Premium Member
join:2010-10-23
Frederick, MD
ARRIS SB8200
Ubiquiti UDM-Pro
Juniper SRX320

sk1939

Premium Member

said by Daemon:

said by sk1939:

I agree that in Samsungs case it was a case where the phones were similar, but it was not necessarily the case with the lawsuit against HTC. The question as far as looks go is how similar/different does a design have to be to not be "close" or a copy of Apple's design. That is the problem with the court case as they have not defined the boundary for such a broad design patent.

To the best of my knowledge, Apple didn't assert any design patents against HTC, so none of that case was about how HTC's phones looked.

One of the patents Apple sued on was design (afformentioned rectangle with rounded corners) as well as the use of a mutli-touch interface on a phone and others.
Daemon
Premium Member
join:2003-06-29
Washington, DC

Daemon

Premium Member

said by sk1939:

One of the patents Apple sued on was design (afformentioned rectangle with rounded corners) as well as the use of a mutli-touch interface on a phone and others.

No, I think you're wrong. The list of the first 20 patents Apple asserted against HTC is here: »www.engadget.com/2010/03 ··· eakdown/

They later added 5 more in a separate complaint: »www.fosspatents.com/2011 ··· int.html

None of those are design related patents.

Metatron2008
You're it
Premium Member
join:2008-09-02
united state

Metatron2008 to Daemon

Premium Member

to Daemon
said by Daemon:

said by Metatron2008:

You actually got one right. Microsoft sued Barnes and Noble.

Apple has a long history of making good devices and then acting like it invented the entire market. You wanna also say that Apple invented the term App store?

I was talking about patents and mobile operating systems, not lawsuits from decades ago or those involving trademarks (which operate completely differently--if you don't sue on a trademark, you lose it by default). So you got me on the Nokia one, but the rest are not relevant in this context.

Stating Android v iOS is about Linux vs Unix is a little silly. The core is not where the controversies arise--nearly all of the lawsuits have been about interfaces not about core feature implementations. Some of them have been algorithmic, but none have involved the actual kernel of the operating system that I am aware of. (The only 'core' lawsuit I can think of is Oracle vs Google re:Android APIs)

And not all OSes share UI features. Apple likes to use Windows Phone as an example of how you can do things in a different enough way that you don't infringe, while still making a device that does all the things users want.

The microsoft one is related, as they actually sued for look and feel of various icons. They sued because a garbage can on windows looks similar to a garbage can on mac os.

And saying you have to sue based on a trademark is a rediculous method of excusing a company suing a grocery store, WHICH SELLS APPLES, for having an apple logo. That is bullying, from a company that doesn't want anybody else using it's 'forbidden fruit'.

digitalfutur
Sees More Than Shown
Premium Member
join:2000-07-15
GTA

digitalfutur to ptrowski

Premium Member

to ptrowski
Well that was fast. Samsung is getting the corer out, forcing Apple to pay 20%, - $2.50 more for each mobile CPU - 200 million of them in 2012.

»www.pcmag.com/article2/0 ··· 1,00.asp

sk1939
Premium Member
join:2010-10-23
Frederick, MD
ARRIS SB8200
Ubiquiti UDM-Pro
Juniper SRX320

sk1939 to Daemon

Premium Member

to Daemon
said by Daemon:

said by sk1939:

One of the patents Apple sued on was design (afformentioned rectangle with rounded corners) as well as the use of a mutli-touch interface on a phone and others.

No, I think you're wrong. The list of the first 20 patents Apple asserted against HTC is here: »www.engadget.com/2010/03 ··· eakdown/

They later added 5 more in a separate complaint: »www.fosspatents.com/2011 ··· int.html

None of those are design related patents.

Design of the GUI rather than the device itself.
Daemon
Premium Member
join:2003-06-29
Washington, DC

1 edit

Daemon

Premium Member

said by sk1939:

Design of the GUI rather than the device itself.

you can call them 'Design of the GUI', but they are still utility patents, not design patents.
Daemon

Daemon to Metatron2008

Premium Member

to Metatron2008
said by Metatron2008:

And saying you have to sue based on a trademark is a rediculous method of excusing a company suing a grocery store, WHICH SELLS APPLES, for having an apple logo. That is bullying, from a company that doesn't want anybody else using it's 'forbidden fruit'.

This is how trademark law works. In order to prevent erosion of your trademark, you virtually have to sue over ridiculous non-infringement. Your trademark is only protected with a moat as far as you can sue. By suing as far as you possibly can, you keep that moat as large as possible. One missed lawsuit and the moat gets irreparably smaller.

Unlike patent law, where your rights remain whether you sue or not once the patent is issued, under trademark law, you automatically lose rights if someone infringes and you don't sue, and you lose them forever.

It's why Microsoft sued a student who ran a teenage web programming business called mikerowesoft.com.