Has Apple Really Ever Invented Anything?

[Meowjin]

video games are moving to free to play as they are more profitable.

the new innovation for tech is open source

media is moving to streaming



The dinosaurs:

closed source OS, then will sue you for modding a product YOU OWN.

On disc DLC.

TOS agreements that result from putting the disc in the computer/ps3/xbox and if you don't agree you are stuck with an opened game you can't return.

Games you own, but can't put on all the computers you own.

Overpriced Cellphone and television plans.

I hope the dinosaurs don't win.

If you think I'm an apple hater dangonay you are wrong since I have had an iphone 3, 4, a macbook air, a macbook pro, another macbook pro over the last 5 years.

Their products were always overpriced and if I didn't get amazing deals with them I would have never payed full price for them.

I'm a hater of stupid bullshit that you are arguing. There is no devil's advocate, you are just being an apple asshole. And it reminds me of those stupid asperger pricks that go on 4chan everyday and think they are being smart or "trolling". We know you love apple products, stop being a tool.

I speak with my money. I am huge into fighting games. I refused to simply buy SFxT because of the controversy of on disk DLC and then the subsequent banning and lawsuits from people who mined data off discs they owned.

The dinosaurs couldn't adapt. The Android platform offers such a massive difference than the iphone platform. If that was the case my "speaking to a brick wall" godfather who is in his 70's and who needs an hour to explain anything would have mistaken my phone several times for an iphone but said that he thinks an android was too "different" to use from an iPhone.

for years apple's only comp was POS blackberry's that would constantly break down and shitty windows mobile phones. They would go through long updates without a proper update. the 3s and the 4s was a fucking joke. When apple gets real competition in the form of an android phones they begin to cry wolf. They no longer can make a 4ss (NOW WITH A SLIGHTLY THINNER DESIGN!).

Yet the android compitition who are competing with eachother keep making better and better phones every 6 months with significant updates. A 600 dollar phone that came out in December is now worth 350 dollars without a contract. And that phone does 720p video, hd video recording, constant software updates from google that is open source (I CAN CHOOSE MY OS DEVELOPER), interchangable battery, a larger screen, NFC.

The download capabilities are fantastic (I can play any video I download from the internet), has a great comic reader (perfect viewer), I can tether from my phone.

[too_slow]

Originally Posted by LiquidTurbo

iPad $500

Samsung SmartTV $2000

Spending hours valiantly defending a company involved in a lawsuit which depending the outcome has no net effect to you, nor company does not belong to you - priceless.

I think a lot of us has/had GOOL/APPL stocks, so technically we do own a tiny fraction of the company.. LOL

[dangonay]

Originally Posted by Culverin

apple just tried to patent the smart cover concept already announced in the Windows Tab 8.

And they just tried to patent the dual shock controller.


People used to hate on M$ because they were dicks with their anti-competitive lawsuits. They stopped doing that and focused on actually trying to make decent products. So the hate stopped.

When Apple decides to stop abusing the patent system, i'm pretty sure the hate will stop too.


There's never been any love lost between Apple and myself. It's their prerogative to create a closed non-competition system on their own platform. I never liked them for it because it think it caters to the lowest-common denominator consumer base and I'm ever but that. However, despite that, I did respect their company philosophy of creating a unified end user experience.

It's one thing to grab patents in a broken system and then license them out to other companies. That's what an ethical business practice would look like.
It's another thing to take advantage of the idiots in the patent office then to use your market leader position to bully everybody else.


Apple use to be ok in my books, but not to my liking. They created closed environments. And while they would do things like locking down a piece of hardware, they weren't all that bad. Until they started doing things like bricking phones with updates, suing the company making hackintoshes, aiming for vague patents then trying to block the competition through the legal system.
Now I think they are just being a douchebag of a company. They even refuse to license their patents for fair use.
They are stifling competition by outgunning the other parties with ill-earned patents and threats of lawsuits.


For every Android device sold, Google pays a certain royalty to microsoft for patents used. As a staunch google fanboy, you don't hear me crying foul about this because those patents are realistic, well conceived and well earned.


At some point in my life, I would have paid for an Apple device if they made one that fit my use philosophy of open platform. Now they went from that to aggressively locking you out of the hardware to being the playground bully.


Until this attitude changes, as an informed consumer they will not get a cent from me to help enable, reward and further this behavior.

In your last sentence you claim to be an "informed consumer" but after reading your rant I find you are anything but informed.

There are varying definitions for "bully", but they are similar: someone who is stronger and uses their strength to intimidate those who are weaker or can't defend themselves.

You claim Apple is being a bully. So how do you explain them going after the single largest electronics company in the world (Samsung)? That clearly doesn't fit the mold of a "bully". Likewise with Motorola or HTC. These are all large corporations with deep pockets and the capability to put up a strong defense in any lawsuit. Perhaps you can list all the small companies Apple is currently "bullying" with multiple lawsuits?

Not only are Samsung, HTC and Motorola able to defend themselves, they are all co-operating against Apple. Google is lending patents to HTC. Samsung is using "paid experts" in the current Apple case who were previously involved in cases for others (like Motorola). It's not a case of Apple against the little guys. It's a case of Apple (the 800lb gorilla) against another 800lb gorilla (Samsung) and his three brothers, the 400lb, 500lb and 600lb gorillas (HTC, Motorola, Google). And this is only the stuff we know about publicly. Only a fool would think that behind closed doors they aren't all sharing information and deciding what to do about Apple.

You say Google is paying MS for every Android device sold. Funny, I never heard of that. Maybe you can show the news story? MS is collecting royalty payments from numerous Android OEM's (like LG, HTC, Samsung and many others). Google has spoken out about it in the past and been very critical of MS and how they are "extorting" Android OEM's. Yet the OEM's keep signing up with MS.

Apple refuses to license their patents? Did you miss the part where they announced the other day that MS is now a licensee? Or the fact they offered to license to Samsung beforethe lawsuits started?

Why are you whining about the patent office? They are pretty much irrelevant at this point. In every lawsuit Apple has been involved in, the other party has exerted significant effort to try and invalidate Apple's patents. A patent has little use until it's been tested in court. If it holds up in court (to a challenge of validity) then you can no longer claim it's a stupid patent or that the patent office shouldn't have granted it. If Apple's patents are, as you claim, vague, then you should be happy they're suing since they will get all their patents invalidated in court. This has all been mentioned in this thread - did you even bother to read through the comments?

Your claim they are "stifling competition by outgunning the other parties with ill-earned patents" is also false. Nobody respects Apple's patents. This is clearly demonstrated by the fact nobody listens to Apple when they initially contact them to warn of infringement - they all wait to take their chances in court instead. So far, most who gambled have ended up losing. The result? Small modifications to Samsung and HTC devices to remove a couple features or change how they work. That's it. Hardly anti-competitive when competitors are still selling their products freely all over the world.

BTW, did you see the three patents Samsung is bringing to court? The first is a way to tell if an e-mail is plain text or contains a photo and act accordingly. The second is playing background music on a mobile device. The third is sending a photo from a photo album/gallery and then returning to where you left off after sending it. Wow, those are some impressively complex patents. I'm surprised they didn't bring in the "smiley" patent (yes Samsung has one and is asserting it in other cases against Apple).

Do you understand the difference between an open and closed system? You claim Apple's is closed, yet they have the largest and best App selection available. They have more than twice the number of developers coding for iOS as Android. They also have the largest selection of aftermarket accessories that work with their products. It's only closed in the sense that they don't license out their OS or allow people to make hardware that runs their OS. What they limit you to do in one area is made up by benefits in another. It's not nearly as black & white as you make it out to be.

As far as Android being "open", well that's another matter altogether. Android was voted as the "least open" of all open source projects in the world. Google likes to claim it's "open source" but their definition of "open source" is suspect. Google doesn't like to adhere to a single license when it talks about open source. If Google was a religion, then they'd mix in Buddhism, Christianity, Islam and a bit of New Age Mysticism and still call it "Christianity". Google likes to be "open source" at times and "closed source" at others, as long as it benefits them at that particular time.


Meowjin: When you can come up with a logical argument instead of that mess you wrote, then let's talk.

[goo3]

Originally Posted by willystyle

Both are working partners. Apple initiates and sues Samsung. Why should Samsung pull out of a 12 billion dollar deal over ridiculous claims set by Apple? No haterade. Simply logic.

Remember, you suggested Apple should NOT source from Samsung if they are suing them. I responded: likewise, if Samsung is so upset, they are free to stop selling to Apple. So, both are willing participants in this game. I don't see a problem here. The pie grows for both companies. That's the logic.

Yet, one side is to be blamed. I find the reasoning to be arbitrary, especially as I pointed out, what they are both doing is common business practice.

[SkinnyPupp]

Jury Will Be Made Aware Apple Destroyed Evidence, As Did Samsung | iPhone in Canada Blog - Canada's #1 iPhone Resource

[StylinRed]

Seems to be the best thread to post this in



Apple is looking to get the Patent for wireless charging.... because they've "improved" it

Ready for ANOTHER patent war? Apple 'invents' wireless charging • The Register

Ready for ANOTHER patent war? Apple 'invents' wireless charging
Wait, it's already a thing? Sorry, can't hear you over the sound of our lawyers
By Bill Ray • Get more from this author

Posted in Hardware, 3rd December 2012 08:31 GMT

Apple is trying to patent wireless charging, claiming its magnetic resonance tech is new and that it can do it better than anyone else. This would be cool if its assertions were true.

Apple's application, numbered 20120303980, makes much of its ability to charge a device over the air at a distance of up to a metre, rather than requiring close proximity. The Alliance For Wireless Power, which also touts long-range juicing, will no doubt be comparing Apple's designs to its own blueprints.

The alliance - of which chip biz Qualcomm and Apple rival Samsung are members - reckons distance charging is its unique selling point, allowing gadgets to top up battery power from inside a pocket or as one walks around an office. It's an argument so compelling that the competing Consortium for Wireless Power promptly extended its standard to encompass the same idea.

Apple's patent application was filed in November 2010, before the alliance was established, but well after tech startup WiPower applied for its patent on the very concept of wireless charging in 2008. WiPower was acquired by Qualcomm and its patents are the bedrock of the alliance's standard, along with some intellectual property from Samsung.

...

more at the link

[Lomac]

Not to hate on Apple or anything (especially since other companies have obviously filed their own patents on similar ideas), but how does Prior Art work in this instance? This concept, along with many successful experiments, has been floating around since the late 19th century. Hell, Tesla managed to get a lightbulb to light up wirelessly back in 1893. Sure, there have definitely been improvements since that initial demonstration, but because of this, shouldn't prior art have negated approvals for patents?

[FerrariEnzo]

Apple is improving old techs and just patenting it. Alot of apple hardware/tech isnt new.. just improved upon and marketed as better then the rest...

[freakshow]

I don't see anything wrong with improving an older technology and patenting it. Now if they used the same technology and patented the fact that theirs is now a certain shape.. that's pretty stupid.

[yray]

huehuehuehuehue I already have wireless charging on my phone

iphones can't even nfc

[twstd_reality]

U.S. patent office declares 'the Steve Jobs patent' entirely invalid on non-final basis

In late October, a first Office action in a reexamination proceeding stated the preliminary conclusion that all 20 claims of Apple's rubber-banding (overscroll bounce) patent are invalid. Back in August, a California jury held Samsung to infringe that patent, and according to interviews jurors gave later didn't make much of an effort to ascertain its validity. This week, the USPTO issued a first Office action rejecting all 20 claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,479,949 on a "touch screen device, method, and graphical user interface for determining commands by applying heuristics", which has been referred to by many people, including Apple's own lawyers, as "the Steve Jobs patent".

[StylinRed]

Apple infringes 3 more patents this time held by Nokia(again) & Sony involving the camera and how you receive/drop calls; originally 14 patents were brought forth but only 3 made it to trial and now a trial for damages is next (likely won't reach there i imagine apple will settle)

Apple Infringes Three Patents With the IPhone, Jury Says - Bloomberg

[twstd_reality]

^^^ saw that too... They also have cases pending against RIM and HTC.

In other news..........

Qualcomm Publicly Attacks Apple’s Recent Patent Litigation

“Of course, Apple’s premise of ‘a willing licensee with a good-faith disagreement who wants nothing other than for a disinterested party to determine what terms are FRAND’ is itself a sham and a pretext. At the recent proceedings before Judge Crabb in the Western District of Wisconsin, Apple’s ‘willing licensee’ mask fell off, when it absolutely refused–even at the cost of having its case dismissed–to commit to take a license to Motorola’s SEP portfolio on whatever terms the court might determine to be FRAND. Having literally walked away, minutes before trial, from an opportunity for an adjudication as to whether Motorola had offered FRAND terms to Apple, Apple should be embarrassed–but apparently is not–to demand that the Commission divest itself of jurisdiction unless and until a ‘U.S. Court has determined [the relevant license terms] to be FRAND’.

If Apple is not a willing licensee, and in any event there is no risk of an exclusion order (or injunction) shutting down a truly willing licensee, what is the real agenda? It is to shelter the unwilling licensee–the infringer that, like Apple, has no interest at all in paying market-validated royalty rates. It is to ensure that SEP infringers can only be called to account under rules, and in fora, in which they may gain yardage, but can never lose.”

[dangonay]

^ If you're going to post stories regarding Apple you should first get your facts straight. Oh, and relying on blogs that are biased against Apple is also not a good idea.

As a result of an inadvertent error, a submission was made in Qualcomm's name on December 10, 2012 that had not been appropriately authorized, and that Qualcomm would not wish the Commission to consider. Accordingly, Qualcomm withdraws that submission, requests that the Commission give it no consideration, and requests that it be treated as though it had never been made. Qualcomm relies solely on its previous submission in this matter of December 3, 2012.

Someone at Qualcomm screwed up big time - I wonder if they still have their job?
Posted via RS Mobile

[twstd_reality]

@dangongay thanks for the life lesson captain corrector! Are you going to tell me how to wipe my a** the "right way" too? I'd be inclined to take your advice, but your arrogance and condescending tone make me go blah. I'll read whatever I feel like thank you very much. Wish I signed in first before I came on here - you're on my ignore list.

[dangonay]

^ Oooohh, I'm getting ignored. That's it, you show me.

It's funny to watch people see an article that paints Apple in a bad light and they're so eager to share it without even checking their facts first.

- It's reported Samsung is going to increase processor prices for Apple by 20%. All the blogs go crazy for this news and can't wait to post. Next day Samsung releases an official statement saying the story isn't true. Most of the blogs don't even bother to update the story and the result is people keep spreading the original, incorrect story.
- It's also reported Samsung is cutting LCD shipments off to Apple. Again, blogs run with it, Samsung release another statement , and the incorrect story is the one that still gets circulated.

Both of these examples were recently posted on RS and I pointed out they were wrong. The funny thing is nobody initially believed what I was saying even though my sources were from official Samsung statements while the original stories were from "inside unnamed sources". Now if people bothered to follow blogs that were halfway credible they would see the stories were updated with a retraction. But the story you linked hasn't been updated even though this information is well-known. Hence my original comment that you should consider your sources before posting an outdated article that's wrong.


I still have to laugh at people thinking I'm the rabid fan when I'm not even doing most of the posting here. Seems several others still can't wait to share anything negative about Apple, however insignificant it may be. Meanwhile, Apple has actually come up with several victories the last few weeks but I haven't bothered to post them since they are "business as usual".

Oh, and your link about Apple's patent being invalidated? It hasn't been invalidated - it's been preliminarily invalidated. It's a significant difference. According to the USPTO, only 11% of patents that get invalidated through ex-parte reexaminations actually stay invalid. Meaning Apple has an 89% chance this patent will get reinstated. Actually better than 89% chance since that 11% figure is an average for ALL patents. It might be unfair, but the fact is large companies like Apple or Samsung have much higher success rates at getting patents reinstated than the "11% average". I wonder how come people seem to be so excited about this since odds are excellent the patent will get reinstated. No, I don't wonder. After all, it's a ray of hope for Apple haters. They'll take any chance they can even if it's 11% or less.

[LiquidTurbo]

[Meowjin]

Originally Posted by dangonay

I still have to laugh at people thinking I'm the rabid fan when I'm not even doing most of the posting here.

[twstd_reality]

@dangonay

Blah blah blah 200 word essay - check
Blah blah blah apple bias - check
Blah blah blah condescending tone - check
Blah blah blah back on ignore - check