Slashdot Mirror

a direct shot with a 9mm at reasonable range would mean they were surgically removing macbook pro bits from the bullet wound on his shoulder/back

It was only handgun ammunition probably from a good distance, and it's not like we have not seen a MacBook stop a bullet before...

Here you go.

Just like MS, Apple stole their entire UI idea from Palo Alto.

Nope. They PAID for that, then took it FAR beyond what Xerox PARC even ENVISIONED.

They have stolen countless software app ideas over the years from devs.

And if you have written more than 10 lines of code in your life, so have you, me, and EVERY other Developer. Next!

Ipod. Stolen. Then refined with a better interface.

So NOT "Stolen". Refined. So, as another Poster said, Porsche "stole" the CAR from "Ford", right?

Ipad. Stolen. Then reality distortion field'ed into being 'revolutionary'.

Stolen? From WHAT, exactly??? Those POS "Slabs" that ran Windows for about 45 minutes and weight 10 pounds? See Porsche, above.

Iphoney. Stolen. Then reality distortion field'ed into being 'revolutionary'.

Again, Really? Who STOLE from WHO, again?

MB Air. Stolen. Then reality distortion field'ed into being 'revolutionary'.

Stolen? Again, from WHO? If you count "Netbooks" as "Prior Art" for the MBA, you might as well count the horse and buggy "prior art" for the Tesla.

Apple TC. Stolen. Then reality distortion field'ed into being 'revolutionary'.

TC? Time Capsule? How does that even make the list? It is nothing more than an obvious marriage of a WiFi Router and a Hard Drive for Time Machine Backups of several machines in the same household. But it isn't "Stolen".

Apple Watch. Stolen. Then they tried but failed to make it into being 'revolutionary'.

Everybody and his dog was more or less simultaneously working on Smart Watches. Apple's is cooler than most, because of the infrastructure it shares. But I don't think that anyone particularly "Stole" stuff from anyone else. There are only so many ways to do a SmartWatch. That's why they are ALL so similar. But seriously, STOLE???

And then offstage a Xerox representive coughs, walks onstage, announces who he is, punches each one in turn, and storms off, pissed.

If you are referring to the Research that Apple PURCHASED from Xerox PARC, then I can't see his justificaton to punch "Apple".

Um...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

http://obamapacman.com/wp-cont...

Well lets see...both are single task designed OSes, both have a look like something from the early 90s and oh yeah...both suck.

So I'd say its a pretty apt mistake to make. BTW I have a question to all those Win 8 apologists...why do you not praise the "innovation" of sticking teeny tiny desktops on cellphones? Because all MSFT did was flip the same tired old shit they did for a decade, instead of stuffing a desktop GUI on a cellphone they jammed a cellphone GUI, complete with appstore crapstore and swipe gestures, onto a desktop where it makes NO fucking sense. Hell for that matter why aren't you replacing the steering wheel in your car with bike handlebars? After all by MSFT logic since bikes are growing and are the most popular UI worldwide for transportation that MUST make them superior and therefor perfect to use anywhere for anything.

I think I'll just leave this here and note how many times he says things like "stop" and "I don't want that" as the OS actively fights against the user who isn't doing the "tweeting twits and social shit" MSFT clearly designed the OS for. A GOOD UI should HELP the user and get out of the way, a BAD UI is a hindrance...which would you say Win 8.x is?

You don't get it. Xerox allowed Apple to visit PARC. But they did not give them any copyright licenses or patent licenses or anything like that. Back then software couldn't be easily patented.

And when did I say Apple got copyrights? NOWHERE. Apple got rights to use concepts and ideas they saw at Xerox PARC. For which Xerox was compensated. The PARC engineers didn't want to but they were ordered by HQ.

Why do you think Xerox sued Apple?

Because a dozen years later, under new management, they forgot about their deal. SCO forgot or ignored the fact that Novell didn't sell them Unix copyrights only the Unix business. It took years to resolve SCO v Novell even though SCO never had a case.

The lawsuit only failed because the statute of limitations passed i.e. Xerox took too long to sue Apple after they released an infringing product.

Wrong. Apple claimed statute of limitations as a defense but that is not why the court rejected 5 of 6 Xerox's claims. The judge gave Xerox 30 days to come up with evidence for the last claim however the last claim was not seeking damages and was insignificant.

Fortunately, Windows 8 == 1996:

http://obamapacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/AOL-1996-vs.-Microsoft-Windows-8.jpg

Apple is pissed off that everyone copied them. And everyone did. This is not in dispute. THIS REALLY HAPPENED.

Oooh, let me try!

But Apple has misbehaved in exactly the same manner, for the same absurdly ridiculous details.

You can't just look at Apple v. Samsung as though the complaint was isolated. This is the way law works. If you steal bread and get caught, you'll get charged for stealing bread, sure... but you'll also get charged with breaking and entering, trespassing, walking on the wrong side of a highway, and anything else the prosecution can think up... maybe most won't stick, but we're not going to let you get away with stealing bread even if it means we're prosecuting you for wielding a deadly weapon (the bread). That's what you and everyone else that is hating on Apple is conveniently ignoring... that this is how the law has ALWAYS worked. Apple is pissed off that everyone copied them. And everyone did. This is not in dispute. THIS REALLY HAPPENED. It's not a case of "oh, well... that's how everyone's design would have trended even if Apple never existed" --- which, btw, has always been a bullshit argument. Apple's R&D is legendary. Apple, in strict secrecy, spent millions of dollars and years working on this "perfecting" the smart phone experience, and iPhone is the culmination of that effort. Then, 6 months after iPhone is released, behold! ALL SMARTPHONES LOOK LIKE IPHONE. Apple's complaint in Apple v. Samsung was about blatant copying... but Apple can't quite get the offender for the exact, precise crime... thus... they got Samsung on some bullshit... and Samsung deserved it (Apple gave Samsung many opportunities to make it right, and even Google was telling Samsung to back off the blatant near-counterfeiting of iPhone, but Samsung WANTED to copy the iPhone because they knew they might get away with it).

I say let Apple do as they wish. If they can protect their IP, then good for them. If they can't... then we're just going to have to get used to a long lasting trend of zero innovation... because what is the point of spending time and resources on innovation if another company can come along, reverse-engineer your innovation in a few months, and release a product that is superficially similar, and fool 1 in 5 (or better) of what should have been your customer into buying the knock off? None... no point in spending anything on innovating anything new... because you can't justify the cost, and the subsequent loss by copy theft.

Sorry Reziac but I tried the shell hacks and it don't fix enough, it still has all that shit running in the background, you just can't see it, so its still sucking up your net with all the tweeting twit shit social crap, still has the royally fucked up "If you thought the ribbon was irritating boy are YOU gonna be pissed!" God awful Ribbon UI based file explorer, so its still fucked, its like dumping a can of perfume on a pile of shit as it may not smell as bad, but its NOT roses.

That may be it, I honestly couldn't remember how old the kid was, i just knew it was a little kid. Still don't get what a kid randomly poking shit to get it to do stuff is supposed to "prove" though, other than little kids like shiny things and will spend hours fucking with them. To me a MUCH more telling video is this one where a guy sits his nan in front of a Win 8 PC just like she got her new laptop home and fired it up. if it was soooo intuitive, why is she sitting there completely lost Why is it that without a long list of arcane commands memorized she can't get shit done? I just wish i had links to the guy that did it was his uncle because sure enough the apologists came on and said "It would be the same if it were OSX, he is just confused by the new hotness!" and the guy simply answered "Challenge accepted" and filmed his uncle in front of the latest OSX, he was surfing the net in less than 3 minutes just fine.

And the reason it reminds you of the primitive GUIs of the 80s is because that is exactly what it is since MSFT didn't know how to build a mobile OS that didn't have a teeny tiny start button and microscopic menus they just went back to the pre Win95 single tasking crap. I also think its because they have added so much shit on top of the WinNT kernel over the years they simply can't figure out how to have it use modern features without blowing through the RAM and CPU budget of ARM so rather than actually investing into learning they just said "fuck it, what did we do when the PC didn't have much memory and a tiny screen? We'll just do that again" and thought we would forget our history.

Well I personally sure as hell haven't, and even on my little 12 inch netbook i run more than one fricking task at a time! I'm buying exactly one copy next month before the sale ends, just to add beside my copy of Vista and in case i ever run across a piece of software that HAS to have Win 8 I can slap it in a VM, but personally I'd rather be stuck 10 hours a day on a Vista Basic netbook than have Win 8 touch my desktop again, fuck that mess.

This is a company that used icons from the iphone in a shop shop display. They either don't think things through properly or they knew there was realistically only one outcome.

Actually as someone that used Win 3.11 I resent that remark, Win 3.11 looked nice. Windows 8 is AOL 96 complete with ugly green background that nobody liked even then, thanks ever so.

Interestingly, your picking up on Ronald being a potentially unreliable source mirrors another Gizmodo article from a year back regarding Apple retail stores. They posted a contest asking for "Genius Bar Horror Stories", and accepted them via comment or e-mail, but apparently didn't bother to fact check any of them before publishing them. Besides the fact that the entire premise of the contest sets them up for accepting fictitious stories written by users wanting to get a chuckle or free pizza, someone else did a teardown analysis of each story, considering the various factors in determining just how likely the story actually was.

Long story short, they have a history of not bothering to check sources, particularly when they are self-serving.

Apple is suing samsung for violating their patents some of which are designs. My point is samsung isn't saying they're innocent but their excuse is that Apple did it first therefore it's ok. Which would be but they don't seem to be able to decide who they ripped off the idea from. First Sony and now some guy. It can't be both.

Samsung's problem is that they do go out of their way to make things look like Apple stuff. Even their connectors look the same. http://cdn.mactrast.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Samsung-Apple-Cable-Copy.jpg

And even things like using Apple's icons for their shop displays. http://obamapacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Samsung-Mobile-Italy-store-copies-Apple-App-Store-Safari-Icons-Euronics-Centro-Sicilia.jpg

Despite the fact their tablet does actually have a different home screen they don't often show that because it looks more like an ipad when they show off all the icons. So, I'm finding it hard to sympathise with them because they have gone above and beyond to make an ipad-like tablet. Of course that was why they were singled out.

The whole idea that Apple sues anyone making round cornered tablets is ridiculous given that they all look like that and it's Samsung in courts over this.

Guys- is it ever any surprise that apple copies a design? They design well, but that is because all of their work is second generation. They take a concept then make it shiny, and sell it. They don't make concepts. Hell- the apple 2 was literally a XEROX!

Wow. Are we so far out in computing history that we don't remember the difference between an Apple ][ (designed in 1976 and first sold by Apple in 1977), and the Lisa (first designed by Apple in 1978 and first sold by Apple in 1981)?

And oh, BTW, Apple didn't "copy Xerox". Apple was shown some technology that Xerox PARC was working on, then they started riffing on it, bringing many improvements. Then, Apple LICENSED the tech from Xerox.

They stole NOTHING.

No, there isn't.

"An example of this is that when Apple moved to x86 based designs, people could easily compare specs across the board because they used the same hardware as everyone else."

And we all see how badly the Intel transition worked for Apple....

http://obamapacman.com/2011/06/mac-growth-beats-pc-industry-for-5-years/

So that's why there's an iPad on the Discovery in the movie 2001 made in 1969!

Oh boy. http://obamapacman.com/2011/08/debunked-samsung-2001-space-odyssey-as-ipad-prior-art-analysis/

Anybody still claiming that has swallowed Samsungs Fool-Aid to the last drop. Especially when they also babble on about "rounded corners".

Well, if Apple sues Samsung for making a tablet with the same dimensions, but black, despite prior art (Space Odysessy 2001)

Thanks for proving you're a moron. As well as the Moderators. But what else is new.

Like the summary said. 2001: A Space Oddessy beat them both by about 40 years.

Not the movie. http://obamapacman.com/2011/08/debunked-samsung-2001-space-odyssey-as-ipad-prior-art-analysis/

http://obamapacman.com/2011/08/debunked-samsung-2001-space-odyssey-as-ipad-prior-art-analysis/ No touchy.

the reason Evi have been asked to change. Because the UI is too much of a Siri copy.

Another Kubrick-Goes-To-Court in the works?:

http://idealab.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/stanley-kubricks-2001-a-space-odyssey-invalidates-apples-design-patent-on-the-ipad-says-samsung.php

That was stupid when Samsung claimed it, it hasn't become better since. http://obamapacman.com/2011/08/debunked-samsung-2001-space-odyssey-as-ipad-prior-art-analysis/

Full article (for those too lazy to linkify).

When you can site 2001: A Space Oddessy as prior art, that gives Samsung license to tell Apple to go eat a bowl of dicks.

Errm, you can "site" something as long as you want, if it doesn't actually fit, you are blowing smoke. And since the device in 2001 doesn't actually look like an iPad (or any other device sold today), that's what you just did. Nice Debunkification here.

Apple does do both of the things you claim they don't. Maybe not on their website (that I know of), but definitely during their public keynotes. For instance, they have shown graphs comparing the speed of their latest device to that of Android devices already on the market, and they do compare app store numbers. They even had the balls to put WebOS apps on the graph with only 18 apps, when the store had been open for a grand total of three days... Apple's app store had been open for over a year at that point. Pretty shady if you ask me. Note that I am not an Android fanboy, just pointing out the errors in your post. My family owns three Macbooks, two iPhones, two iPods, and an iPad. Those are just the two examples I could quickly find in the few minutes I typed up this post, I'm sure there are many more.

Windows 95 introduced the start menu.

Which is rip off of the old Apple menu. And Windows 3.1 was a (very ugly) rip off of the original Mac desktop interface

"Mac desktop interface" and _every_ other desktop interface is a rip off of Xerox desktop from 1960s! Matter of fact, both atknison and jobs dudes had a tour of xerox and they saw the original desktop interface there, and once Atkinson got back, he started to implemented Lisa which was a copy of Xerox desktop.

Xerox also invented the mouse. And bunch of other crap that apple (and everyone else) just ripped off.

I'm sick of stupid apple fanboys claiming that apple invented the wheel and bread slices.

Apple is just another evil corporation run by assholes.

This meme belongs in the trash with the One-Button Mouse meme.

Here's the real scoop; but I doubt if you have the brain cells to care.

Oh, and Xerox did NOT invent the mouse. Douglas Engelbart did.

Sure, versioning has been around forever. But autosave, and preserving system state through a restart? I've seen both done on a per-application basis, but not systemwide.

Then I guess you missed Lisa 7/7 (also the world's first integrated office application(s)). That lighted power switch on the front of the Lisa? If it was running the LisaOS (instead of MacOS), pressing that button performed a system save and shutdown, and pressing it again did a restart and reboot. This two-part video here and here shows just how advanced the Lisa was. In fact, that (and the hideous price) was (were) the two main reasons the Lisas became landfill, instead of a household name. And there's no denying that it paved the way for the desktop/windowing metaphor.

BTW, notice that even in the first incarnation of the Lisa OS, it allowed for heirachical folders. That feature didn't appear in Windows until Windows 95. Amazing.

Designed starting in 1978. Released in 1983. I think they won.

And before someone starts all that bullshit about "Apple stole Xerox PARC's work", let me say this: 1) Apple PAID Xerox for to use their work. And 2) Without the improvements (not the least of which was pulldown menus!) that some very talented engineers made, that preliminary GUI work would not have become really useable, let alone nearly ubiquitious.

The reason, Xerox was an Apple investor, it'd be like suing yourself

  “Xerox could have owned the PC revolution, but instead it sat on the technology for years. Then, in exchange for the opportunity to invest in a hot new pre-IPO start-up called “Apple,” the Xerox PARC commandos were forced — under protest — to give Apple’s engineers a tour and a demonstration of their work. The result was the Apple Macintosh, which Microsoft later copied to create Windows.
[...]
The compensation for the Xerox PARC technology sharing deal with Apple was in form of $1 million dollars pre-IPO Apple stock / investment (if Apple does well, Xerox will benefit from Apple’s success)."

Yes, but between a faster CPU and HSPUA radio, the iPhone 4 is noticeably faster 3G in supported areas. I don't know about on WiFi.

Example test

The Epic 4g has the same processor as the iPhone 4, a 1-GHz ARM Cortex A8. It has a newer GPU, the PowerVR SGX 540 as opposed to the 535 in the iPhone. It also has 512mB of RAM instead of the 256 in the iPhone. It has a few other advantages, like the Super AMOLED screen, which I can attest is absurdly high in contrast, brightness, saturation, and ... power usage. The iPhone 4 in comparison has a 60% higher rez screen, is smaller, and runs iOS, which at present is definitely still an advantage. For me it came down to the fantastic deal that Sprint's bottom of the line plan for smartphone users offers. Also, post-patch about a week ago, the 3g speeds are noticeably faster than that chart suggests, which is good because 4g is worthless in heavy brick buildings, basements, and while moving. It's also worth noting that in a month, it hasn't dropped a single call. >.>

Yes, but between a faster CPU and HSPUA radio, the iPhone 4 is noticeably faster 3G in supported areas. I don't know about on WiFi.

Example test

Apple did not steal the GUI from Xerox. They got to tour PARC with permission from Xerox's upper management and compensated Xerox with pre-IPO shares. What the Mac did with the ideas from PARC was very different from what Xerox did with the ideas out of PARC. This is also very different from Microsoft sending an employee to copy implementation details from Apple. Do go waving some out of context quote around without knowing the actual history of the situation.

1) The community has a fix for the exploit [ http://obamapacman.com/2010/08/cydia-pdf-loading-warner-helps-prevent-ios-security-hole-exploit/ ] 2) As you mentioned, when 4.1 or 4.0.1 is released just upgrade and jailbreak

With Android you can install any software you want. With Apple, all apps have to be approved an bought from an Apple App Store.

With Android you can choose from multiple Markets (Android app stores) or install applications directly yourself. That is the big difference.

Ok, so with 250,000 (and growing by the second!) apps in the Apple App Store, and an estimated 50,000+ Android Apps (plus an insignificant additional number NOT in the Marketplace), I'd say, FOR THE AVERAGE USER, that the "Walled Garden" of the App Store is pretty fucking HUGE compared to the "Fully Open World" of Android Appdom.

In fact, over FIVE TIMES BIGGER (and the difference is getting LARGER with each passing SECOND, not smaller).

And, oh, BTW, HERE's what your precious "Freedom ton install any software you want" vs. "all apps have to be approved and bought from an Apple App Store" REALLY buys you. That is not a theory, it is fact.

"Liberty" on smartphones is NOT the same as "Liberty" in government. And, just so I don't get some sort of snippy retort, TRUE "Liberty" would mean that I could hunt you down and kill you for not agreeing with me. Do you really think THAT's "1337"?

like the economist cover?

http://obamapacman.com/2010/02/nexus-one-sales-fail-comparing-iphone-droid-n1-first-month-demand/

If I was Jobs, I wouldn't panic.