Slashdot Mirror
Apple Rips Off Rejected App, Says Wireless Sync Developer
Haedrian writes "Apple is famous for going to absurd lengths to enforce its patents and trademarks. It recently sued Amazon for calling its app store Appstore. And it has publicly lectured competitors to 'create their own original technology, not steal ours.' Last year, UK developer Greg Hughes submitted an app for wirelessly syncing iPhones with iTunes libraries, which was rejected from the official App Store. Fast forward to Monday, when Apple unveiled a set of new features for the upcoming iOS 5, including the same wireless-syncing functionality. Cupertino wasn't even subtle about the appropriation, using the precise name and a near-identical logo to market the technology."
in this age of corporate hypocrisy, it amazes me how any company has fanboys at all.
You can't trademark a descriptive name. The idea of wireless sync'ing itunes is not original. Sorry man, maybe they ripped off your icon but that's as far as it goes.
Apple may have been working on this functionality for iOS 5, when Hughes released his version, but that doesn't excuse the arrogant behavior. At the very least, they could have brought him in as a consultant or paid him for his efforts.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
It seems his app violated the developer agreement from TFA:
that it did things not specified in the official iPhone software developers' kit.
It's not news that Apple devs aren't constrained by the same agreement as other developers. If you use private/undocumented APIs then it's common knowledge that you'll probably get rejected so why even bother?
Firstly, Apple may have rejected the app precisely because they were already developing the technology for iOS5 and knew that a syncing app would be redundant when iOS5 came out (and may have got into more trouble by allowing the app and then bringing out wireless sync technology in iOS5 when an app already provided the functionality.) Also, a third party app is not the place for this technology: it should be embedded in iOS5 as Apple are doing. Secondly, the logo combines the wireless logo (which is standard and is not an invention of this student) with the sync logo (two arrows round a circle) which is again standard and predates this student's app. Combining the two in the obvious way makes sense and it is hard to think of a better way of doing it. Again, Apple may have been developing this in house before this app and thus were right to reject it as they would an app that duplicates current built in functionality of iOS.
John_Chalisque
In the words of Steve Jobs, I need another liver buddy !! Ya wanna sell me your liver ?? Yes, and we can talk about your app, but say no, and I'LL EAT YOUR LIVER !!
"Since the official rejection, Hughes's app has become one of the most popular offered in the Cydia store, with more than 50,000 sold in the past 13 months. Throughout that time, Wi-Fi Sync has cost $9.99, not including occasional promotional discounts."
I wish I could come up with a rejection that earned me a few hundred grand. He must be crying while rolling around in all that money.
I like big butts and I cannot lie.
Um dude, seriously?
Apple is moving to "iCloud" and had invested billions into a new data center promoting this initiative. This wasn't a "new idea because somebody posted an app they thought was cool so they stole it" type thing.
They had been moving this direction for a long long time. Syncing via wifi was next.
As far as the logo, they came up with the logo the same way you did. Take "iSync" + wifi + icloud brushed metallic look and bam, you have their logo. No brainer.
Syncing via wifi had been a much requested and anticipated feature. Not a fly by night ripoff idea from a Joe blow submission.
An app that does wireless syncing for iTunes is pretty obvious. Sure, Apple didn't have it before... but come on.. it's not like that dude invented the concept. And for the name.. it's called "Wi-Fi Sync." I mean if all the Apple Haters out there think that Apple's use of the term "App Store" is too generic because it describes what it is and therefore not trademarkable, then doesn't that also apply to an app that does wi-fi sync which is called "Wi-Fi Sync?" Congrats to the developer for selling so many copies via Cydia, and certainly there's a market to make and sell features that Apple hasn't made yet. But you can't possibly think that Apple got the idea and the name from this guy.
Honestly, Apple freaks are worse than Amiga freaks (and I used to be Amiga freak of worst kind).
And that is not a compliment.
like how apple stole hardware tech from nokia, ericsson, etc and never paid them royalties?
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
For the love of God, the name of the app is "WiFi Sync". What the fuck else are they going to call an app that syncs over WiFi?
For the love of God, the name of the store is "Amazon Appstore". What the fuck else are Amazon going to call their store that sells apps?
Both Logos are a combination of the universal wifi symbol, and the universal sync symbol. If you asked a room full of graphics designers to come up with a wifi sync logo, that's what half of them would have made. Besides the basic shapes involved, they're pretty dissimilar in terms of design and color. Still, what do you expect coming from The Register. Didn't they just run a thing about how hackers can now email you grenades and blow up your computer?
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
I'm of the opinion that you can't "rip-off" an insanely obvious idea. Anybody with an IQ over 60 has wondered why they couldn't do this with their iDevice.
Let me save you a few minutes RTFA.
an app for wirelessly syncing iPhones with iTunes libraries
... is such an obvious idea that talking about "stealing" it is meaningless. It is also something that has existed for some time on other platforms - e.g. Samsung Android phones can do wireless sync of pretty much everything since Galaxy S. So he can't claim the idea.
Cupertino wasn't even subtle about the appropriation, using the precise name and a near-identical logo to market the technology
Let me clarify something here. The precise name in question is "Wi-Fi Sync". For an application that syncs your phone over wireless. Gee, that's one obscure name for this kind of app - no way Apple could have stumbled onto that by chance!
Now the logo. here is the side-by-side comparison. Now, this consists of the de-facto standard "expanding wave" icon for wireless signal (on Apple's version, pretty much exactly as it's rendered in the status bar), placed inside the de-facto standard "circle of two arrows" icon for sync. The amount of creativity required to produce such an icon, given what the app does, is exactly zero - it's literally taking two stock icons for two parts of the (itself obvious) name, and merging them together. If someone asked me to sketch an icon for such an operation, this would probably be one of the first things I'd draw.
If you really want to bash Apple, a meaningful point would be that a third-party app implementing such wireless sync had to use private APIs (which is what caused its rejection from App Store) - on Android, such things are easily implemented.
Apple's first introduction of the desktop and icons was something they stole when they visited Xerox which came up with the technology first and was using it in house. Apple execs came to visits Xerox's headquarters saw the technology then went up replicated it and sold it to the public.
Just because you are wrong and I called you out on it doesn't mean I am a Troll.
Last I checked, that would make this a derivative work.
Not if Apple were working on theirs first, which they obviously were.
There is such a thing as a truly parallel effort. Syncing over WiFi is an obviously desirable feature and Apple can be working on a feature years before release to get it just right or wait for hardware to become powerful enough to support something.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
So if a wi-fi syncing app called Wi-Fi Sync is obvious, therefore Apple can steal...er...appropriate it for its own use without repercussions, then I would assume by the same token that a store selling apps called App Store is obvious, therefore anyone can appropriate the name for their own use as well. Apple, what say you?
I am sorry but why should i feel sorry for people who wants to earn money helping closed systems ? I see it like helping dictatorship ...
accusing someone of stereotyping while you yourself do the same is hypocritical.. so I guess I'll join in the fun.. gtfo you fuckin straightedged prettyboy and go flap your skinny little arms to the other faggots in your expensive coffee hangout. dont' spill any coffee on those messenger bags.
So what if the name is predictable.
Try making a graphical OS and name it "Windows", and tell the judge the name is evident because it uses windowed views.
He did it first. He got the put the evident name to his product. Prior art, and submitted to Apple to boot. The burden of proof for not stealing is on Apple.
And in any fair trial apple would get bashed into the ground for this.
Did you forget the hundreds of millions of dollars apple had to pay the music industry cartel to get this exact some functionality? Apple probably rejected the app for fear of legal trouble, or at least that the industry would stop supporting the iTunes store. And stole the idea? It's about as obvious as it gets. Anyways, doesn't the Zune already let you sync your music wirelessly?
Well, not quite. Apple hired Larry Tesler from Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, and he hired some of of his buddies from there. They were all unhappy because PARC had invented all this great stuff and Xerox wasn't doing anything meaningful with it.
So, it was no surprise when Larry and company produced many of the things they had pioneered at PARC, except better because they now had some experience of what worked and what didn't.
If you want to assign blame, then most of it should fall on Xerox for not using the stuff they had, and allowing their engineers to get unhappy enough that they left for a company that paid less but would use their talents.
P.S. I was one of those guys....
You can you compare the code? Apple aren't going to release theirs.
This story along with this one and this one and others (not going to hunt down any more links) like the "App Store" lawsuit with Amazon, and the patent application for the same technology Pandora and Spotify are using.... isn't Apple starting to step on too many toes here? Where do you draw the line between ballsy, brilliant, business strategy and sheer corporate arrogance? I feel like if Apple continues to conduct business like this, they're going to end up where Microsoft was at the turn of the millenium: a courtroom.
If you want to justly accuse somebody of theft, don't compare the damn logo and the name. Compare the CODE. Is there no length a neckbeard will go to to find something Apple-related to nerdrage about?
Obviously none of us can compare the code so why bother saying something you know is impossible.
We can however call bullshit when app designers are treated like shit and shutdown for reasons that I personally view as unjust.
Is neckbeard a new term? Up until just a year or two ago I've never heard anyone use that and now it seems to be a new meme.. It must be ancient because I think of old ham operators who can churn out morse code faster than I can type.
Nerdrage is funny... What term should we assign to Apple fanboys who think they are better than nerds?
To be fair, the name of the app is "Wi-Fi Sync", and the icon is arrows in a circle (used for the Time Machine icon, for example) with Apple's own wi-fi icon in the middle. I'm thinking there's some sampling going on in both directions. Ironically, if Mr. Hughes' app hadn't been around, Apple might have come up with a more creative name and icon.
Apple may have ripped him off to some degree, but they may have already been planning this feature. As other posters have pointed out, also, they rejected his app because it didn't meet their guidelines, which is a separate topic.
We're wanted men. I have the death sentence in 12 systems!
Too bad for him, but the old saying is if you sleep with dogs, you get fleas.
Look at the history of Jobs and business partners.
Jobs lied to The Woz about a payment, just to keep $1,000 in his pocket VS what was agreed to.
Jobs claimed his daughter Lisa was not his, to avoid the support payments.
H. Ross Perot called his money in NeXT his worse investment (the 'lies' there could just be thought of as overoptimistic investment statements)
And if you were an Apple ][ developer, a Newton Developer, someone who was looking to the Red Box as pitched at WWDC 1997 or someone who was involved in the Mac 'clone' maker market - what makes you think you are gonna get a better deal then they did?
You can't trademark a descriptive name.
That's rich coming from a company who's name is "Apple".
How much more f-ing generic can you get? "Air" Oh yeah, they already have a product named that too.
Yet another article makes Slashdot, well after it has been thoroughly torn to shreds as bullshit on Reddit, Hacker News, and other sites. Why can't Slashdot editors take a quick look at other, more timely sites to see if a submission is total BS before approving it?
Quick summary of the problems with this article. First, people have been asking for wireless sync as soon as iPhone launched. It is idiotic to think they got the idea from this guy's app.
Second, Apple in fact implemented wireless sync for AppleTV, long before this guy's app came along for iPhone, showing Apple in fact knows how to wirelessly sync things with iTunes. The lack of wireless sync in iPhone was by choice, not because they didn't know how to do it.
Third, the guy's app actually syncs using Apple's sync mechanism and code. All he's doing is using non-public APIs to invoke Apple's mechanism over wifi. That's the reason his app was rejected. Using APIs that aren't in the documented SDK is not allowed.
The icon is an obvious combination of symbols Apple is already using.
The name is also obvious, since Apple is dropping the use of "Airport" generally in favor of "Wifi".
That's BS. It's the exact same functionality with the exact same name and damn near the exact same logo. If it were one or two of those things, I might be willing to chalk it up to coincidence or obviousness. But the whole trifecta? After Apple engineers have had exclusive access to his app and acknowledged that they were impressed by it? And after it's been highly visible on Cydia? (If you don't think Apple engineers are looking at Cydia apps, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you...) To pretend like it's all just some big coinkidink?
No sir, I don't buy it, not for a damn minute. I think they were impressed with his app so much that they decided to add it to their own feature list to be implemented, turn it down to deny him money and reputation he should have been earning, saw it doing well on Cydia, and pushed it out as an "upgrade" so that everyone will be zealously adoring of how smart they are for something they should have had working from day one and that someone else smarter than them figured out before they could.
This was blatant abuse of their power as gatekeeper of the one and only official app store. It's disgusting, and while I'm usually not a fan of IP lawsuits, I hope this guy wins a million or three in damages for what Apple denied to him. He has provable damages and has them dead to rights for wholesale stealing his work. In the US, this would be an obvious violation of copyright and probably trademark too. Hopefully in the UK they have similar enough laws that it would be there, too.
And what the hell difference does it make if they asked him for his résumé? Did they offer him a job? Apparently not. If anything, that sounds patronizing to me, kind of like, "Let's dote some praise on the guy whose work we're going to steal. Maybe he'll just stupidly go away and not bother us."
And yeah, it pisses me off even more that these are the same bastards that go after people who have the unmitigated gall to call something iWhatever or offer to sell apps in a--gasp!--app store!
And I'm sure he used some interesting and impressive hacks to trick the iphone into wirelessly syncing.
Well **IF** he went the undocumented API route then there would be no conspiracy regarding the app rejection. Undocumented APIs are an automatic rejection, it may even be part of the automated prescreening process -- completely automated, no human judgement call.
the Apple sync logo has always been rotating arrows, and the wireless logo has always been the same , so logically wi-fi sync will combine the two items. So sue Apple, if they stole your (TM) trademark. As for the concept of Wi-Fi sync, what It was your unique idea? c'mon, it was probably on Apple's to do list. If they stole code, then you have a beef, if they came out with a similar item, well stand in line with all of the people that duplicate ideas, the world if full of them.
There was an unknown error in the submission.
Nerdrage is funny... What term should we assign to Apple fanboys who think they are better than nerds?
Hipster
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me". - stolen from Dan C alt.os.linux.slackware
Don't be ridiculous apple, we are all building off each others ideas no matter how innovative we think we are. As developers no matter how many laws we try to make or how many people we try to convince of this illusion, software and ideas are not the same as property and they never will be.
It's common with Apple to rip of other people's work (and make it (look) better), it's what their whole business is built upon, steve jobs has never really thought up something really by himself, he always ripped it from others, he's a master at it...
1 - think of something obvious that Apple hasn't implemented yet
2 - write an App that sort of implements it
3 - wait for Apple to finally include it
4 - get major press coverage making out Apple as a thief
5 - Fame!
6 - Profit?
Insert
> FWIW, silly policy rejecting apps that duplicate iOS function, but it is in the rules. I am not surprised the app was rejected.
I think you missed the point. The function is not available in iOS.
I'm an Apple supporter (and yes, I use PCs too), but this is just wrong. Apple has incorporated other applications' functionality into their own software, but at least in some cases they bought out the developer's company or hired him. Although in this case they said "send in your resume", they still can easily afford to compensate him and publicly acknowledge his invention. That would have been the right thing to do.
Is it beyond plausibility that Apple was already working on wireless sync when his app was submitted?
That's kinda important, you know...
Back in university days I took a course on entrepreneurship. The prof then said, "if you need to do something and you don't think its going to get you in trouble, don't ask for permission, just do it. Ask the permission later."
This is exactly what Apple did. They were plannig sync functionality (or liked what this guy was doing, which is less likely), so they rejected him and put out their version. This is what they needed to do. Now comes the "ask for permission" part. In Apple's case, this will mean paying off the dude in what will probably be an out-of-court settlement. This is just business. It's sad, but as a business, Apple could do nothing better. Jobs is no charity, and this shouldn't come as a surprise.
For the idealist in you, for most of the cool apps out there the dream payoff is to get bought out by someone big (Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, IBM, whatever). There are many ways to get bought out. Settlement is one of these ways, and is no worse than a restrictive takeover.
For a store that sells apps for computers and/or smartphones.
Additionally, the functionality that Apple sues others for is, just like this Wifi synch app, something other people do. But, when Apple copies it, it's just what they ought to do. When Google does it, it's a vile theft.
App Shop
What? How are those things in any way opposed? Can Apple not copy two things at once? I thought their mobile developers could handle multitasking these days.
The app was out a year before this feature was included in iOS. To make matters even more insulting, they've copied the design of the icon this guy created for his own app. They're spitting in his face. Try RTFA instead of trying to pretend to yourself like Apple are always good guys.
which is totally what she said
I think you missed the entire point of TFA, which was an entire year before they announced their "feature" this guy had ALREADY submitted an app which they shamelessly ripped off for their OS, right down to the logo.
Now this is one time when I can honestly say I hope some land shark of an attorney really tears into them and costs them shitloads of money. I mean seriously, how much would it have cost just to buy the guy out? Not much I wager, instead they rip off the little guy and give him nothing but the finger. Well i hope that attitude costs them a nice boatload of money and this guy gets to sit back in the sun sipping his beer and lighting cigars with $100 bills by the time this is over. Talk about sorry!
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
That Apple is caught copying others- yet again?
Apple's success is due to a few factors:
1) creating "best of breed" devices in new or emerging niches- iPod, iPhone, iPad
2) Simplifying the computing experience
3) Steve Jobs marketing skills
Throughout all of this they have rarely initiated new concepts- just implemented them better or with more effective marketing than any of their competitors.
Hell, they don't even create their own operating system anymore- they just copy and modify one of the *nixes!
I am fairly sure that they will have managed to cover themselves well on this though- no code is likely to be quite the same, or any other legal traps that they can't buy themselves out of easily.
FWIW, silly policy rejecting apps that duplicate iOS function, but it is in the rules. I am not surprised the app was rejected.
Oh they rejected it because they were already developing the same thing? So a student programmer works on something apple are allegedly already working on, but this student actually finishes it a full year before the combined might of Apple. Yeah that seems likely.
I see no hypocrisy in either corporatism, or religion; it's a mutual contract: "I will endorse/pay you and you will protect me".
This contract implicitly reads "I will also try to proselytize others provided you kill my enemies".
The above two rules are a very concise and complete short history of the human race.
This is an obvious feature to put into the Apple feature set. You think the Apple devs were sat around wondering what to do and this obvious-thing-to-do-next app hits the appstore and they're blind-sided? I think not. They just don't want another app arriving sooner and stealing their WWDC thunder. It's their playground.
And as for stealing the logo, give me a break! Both the developer and Apple both took the existing Apple logo for 'sync' and the existing Apple logo for 'wireless' and put them together. Not only is that an obvious thing to do it's the *only* sensible thing to do. What else would a good designer do but leverage the existing affordance in both those symbols?
L
Also in the "rules" for the App submission. Apple has the right to reject if it's already a planned development.
Another thing to consider is that the logo in question is a natural progression from the Current Sync Icon, with a Wi-Fi icon dropped in the center.
Lastly the offering from apple is not the same kind of wireless sync that the App author created, it Syncs not to a users computer, but to the cloud, along with allowing even iOS upgrades with wireless..
The Catholic Church has a nearly 2,000 year history, has been the state religion in much of the world for most of the time it's been present in various regions, and ironically, the Catholic Church fully recognizes the imperfection of its own members and clerics.
I'd also add that the Pope is probably also zen-like in his humility compared to Steve Jobs. Which is ironic since he's allegedly the Vicar of Christ which essentially means he's Jesus' regent on Earth and when he speaks for the Catholic Church, he's allegedly infallible.
This doesn't bode well for the consumer if they are blocking good apps as well as the bad.
I think you missed the entire point of TFA, which was an entire year before they announced their "feature" this guy had ALREADY submitted an app which they shamelessly ripped off for their OS, right down to the logo.
I'm not a developer but software like this isn't created in a week is it? I'm sure Apple has many plans for new features to it's software in the works and frameworks that are being built on the next upcoming release (iOS 5.0) that will enable future features that many could guess are coming but either the software or hardware just isn't there yet.
This is not a new or innovative function. I've been doing this with my Palm Tungsten E since I got a bluetooth signal for my PC way back when. Also did he copy the syncing arrows off of Palm? Cause that's what theirs looks like as well. Add in the universal symbol for wireless and you have a pretty standard icon for what many would come up with for wireless syncing.
Just because Apple rejected his application, and then revealed an application of their own, which provided the same feature, does not mean Apple stole his application.
No yesterday, no tomorrow, and no today.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
but this student actually finishes it a full year before the combined might of Apple
If you worked in software you would know that 99.999% of students do not know how to write commercial-quality software. Yes they can cobble together a proof-of-concept or something at alpha quality (at best), but for the most part none of this stuff would ever be robust, stable, or correct enough to release commercially, especially with an Apple brand on it. They don't know the APIs. They don't handle the error conditions. They don't have the edge-cases. They don't have the testing know-how. They don't have the testing tools. They don't have the testing resources. Etc... Any fool can write a program and make it 80% "done". The other 20% is the real art, and takes the most time, even more than the other 80%. So yes, a student could very easily write something that would take Apple a full year or more to finish.
Apple must defend its trademarks, or risk losing them. Apple owns a trademark on 'AppStore' and amazon used just that. Calling it absurd is absurd.
Amazon Programstoreâ¦It's only ever Macs that have used the term Applications.
To make matters even more insulting, they've copied the design of the icon this guy created for his own app.
In all fairness, the guy named his app "Wi-Fi Sync", which is pretty functional as far as naming goes - definitely not much creativity went into the name. His logo is the Apple toolbar wireless icon surrounded by the Apple toolbar sync icon, stylized a bit into an oval rather than a perfect circle. Again, pretty functional and not much to "steal". It doesn't surprise me that Apple would pick the same name, nor that their art department would come up with a similar logo given the name.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
This is hilarious. Do you need me to provide links for Apple Mail accidentally deleting mail, or the OS X Finder accidentally deleting files? And what about the bug-ridden iOS Mail program?
Hold on there champ, put on the breaks. This was reported yesterday and after reading several articles on it already I think you might want to think this over a bit. Wireless syncing is NOT a new idea, it was not a new idea when Apple just announced it, and it was not a new idea when this guy submitted his app, so there is ZERO original thought on the concept from this app developer. Regarding the logo, you may want to look at the logo itself. It is comprised of the two arrows to designate syncing and the WiFi rainbow. You'll note that these logos have been present on Macs for YEARS, and it looks more like the developer ripped off Apple's logos rather than the other way around.
I'm not saying Apple is sinless in this exercise, they definitely rejected an app that they didn't have a problem implementing into their own OS later, so it seems hypocritical, but this developer is not the innocent lamb he claims to be. He's probably very pissed that his Cydia app, which has earned him about $500k, will soon see its sales dry up. I sympathize, I really do, but did he or YOU really think that wireless syncing was an idea the he invented?
>>>this guy had ALREADY submitted an app which they shamelessly ripped off for their OS, right down to the logo.
>>>
Apple == 90s Microsoft. I used to hate the unscrupulous tactics MS used during the late 80s through the year 2000..... and now I see Apple copying many of those tactics. Kinda sad.
So boycott MS.
Boycott apple.
What's left? I used to opt for Atari and Commodore, but they stopped making computers.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
in the "rules" for the App submission. Apple has the right to reject if it's already a planned development.
Ah, so if if I come up with a good idea for a new iPhone app and submit it, all Apple's reviewer(s) need do is send a note over to the appropriate manager, who copies my description to their list of planned apps. My proposal is then rejected because it's now "already a planned development" (as of when the rejection is typed), and I've lost all rights to my idea.
Remind me again why anyone would invest their own time developing new iPhone apps? Yeah, they might not realize that a new proposed app is a good idea, and allow you to do the work. But even then, they can and do pull apps after they've been in the app store for a while. And then a similar app comes out later, with no acknowledgement (or royalties) to the original designer.
It's the music industry's model all over again. They pick a few successes to support and hold up before the rest of us as an incentive, and stick us with one-sided "take it or leave it" contracts that give most of the profits to the distributor, with only pennies per sale to the actual innovator.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Reading the comments so far has been heartening. I am pleased to see that most commentators are intelligent and rational enough to spot the BS and realize that this wasn't a case of Apple copying someone else's idea. That narrative just doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Apple hardly does everything right, but this was clearly a case of an obvious feature with an obvious logo design. The creator of the app wasn't the first to think of it. The only question I have is why Apple chose to wait as long as it did to implement this kind of functionality--at present, the most plausible answer is that they needed a good reason to offer it: the development of iCloud was probably what motivated it, but also, improvements in iOS sync efficiency and Wi-Fi network speeds since the introduction of the iPhone also seems to have played a role. From what I heard, the unofficial Wi-Fi sync app was/is slow.
Apple has had wireless syncing in their products since the original AppleTV was announced in 2006. The icon is the same sync circle Apple has used for iSync since 2003, with the icon they used since 1999 for WiFi.
[Actual Citations Needed on the Following] Droidbois have been pointing out, with much glee, that they've have wireless synching forever, so it must be a case of selective amnesia to be able to think that Apple just saw this app and went "we must assimilate this".
? So a student programmer works on something apple are allegedly already working on, but this student actually finishes it a full year before the combined might of Apple. Yeah that seems likely.
Actually, it seems quite likely. There's are several conventional sayings in the software development biz to the effect that the time to produce anything (and the quality of the result) is an inverse function of the number of people involved in producing it. One form of this is the old comment that adding people to a late software project makes it even later.
Big companies like Apple (or MS or IBM before them) typically take years to develop what one person can write in a week or a month. This is because inter-communication between a set of people is much more difficult that inter-communication within one brain. And the team's result is often bloated and buggy, due to the same communication problems among the developers. It's a problem that every software development manager is quite familiar with.
So it wouldn't surprise me at all if a development team at Apple (who are probably all working on N other projects at the same time) should take a year or more to do something that a "student programmer" might develop in a few weeks. That's the nature of programming. We're good at building things whose details can be held in a single brain. We're not very good at building things whose details are distributed across multiple brains.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Looks to me like it was the guy who copied Apple's icons in the first place - it's an exact copy of the WiFi icon plus a copy of the Time Machine icon. WOW! He deserves to be a millionaire!
> FWIW, silly policy rejecting apps that duplicate iOS function, but it is in the rules. I am not surprised the app was rejected.
I think you missed the point. The function is not available in iOS.
Syncing is what is duplicated. Apple maintains themselves as being solely responsible for core functionality. This is what makes iOS consistent and reliable. It may violate some age-old nerd tradition of being able to tinker with every little detail, but most people tend to prefer things to work well. And complain all you want, but Slashdot contains just a vocal ultra-minority. iOS gives people what they want and is wildly successful for it.
iSue. Apple should pay him fair value for stealing his idea and loss of revenue, let's say 9,99 per iPhone on the market. That should settle it nicely for all parties since it dosen't include possible future revenue. Shame on you Apple.
-Apple fan boy
Imagine if the roles were reversed. If this student had made an app with the same name, very similar logo, and same functionality as one produced by a company after having seen the company's app and its code. Do you honestly believe that the company would not sue this kid into oblivion for doing such a thing?
Remind me again why anyone would invest their own time developing new iPhone apps?
Because iOS is by far the most successful mobile OS to develop for.
But even then, they can and do pull apps after they've been in the app store for a while. And then a similar app comes out later, with no acknowledgement (or royalties) to the original designer.
Funny, your sig is applicable here. [citation needed] indeed! This isn't an app, it's core functionality. Apple has always maintained themselves responsible for providing core functionality. It's part of the developer terms.
Wireless syncing has been in iOS since the original iPhone. Over the years, they've increased its scope and functionality. This is a natural progression of that.
It's the music industry's model all over again. They pick a few successes to support and hold up before the rest of us as an incentive, and stick us with one-sided "take it or leave it" contracts that give most of the profits to the distributor, with only pennies per sale to the actual innovator.
Wait, what? Apple takes a single, simple, well-defined cut. There's no music industry model. No one goes into debt to Apple by making an app. No one gets fronted money to produce an app by Apple, only to find after production, promotion, manufacturing, and distribution, they are now penniless.
There's a bit of a difference between this application and itunes wirelessly syncing. Mostly the fact that your ipod isn't syncing with your computer, its syncing with the itunes music store and downloading your purchases as if i was another authorized device to the music store. I am also happy that, now, I don't have to ask Apple Customer support to let me re-download all my music free of charge when my harddrive died a couple months ago
Just like the guy who created the iOS app "Finger", which was a way to use the iOS Chinese handwriting recognition as an input device for your OS X computer. Apple incorporated the iOS Chinese handwriting input into Snow Leopard. The evolution was inevitable, just like adding WiFi sync.
Gee, who would ever call an app that syncs over wifi "wifi sync"? And, who would ever think to use a combination of the wifi signal symbol and sync symbols as an icon for something that syncs over wifi? That is shear madness.
For all he knows, Apple rejected his app because it already had the functionality in the pipeline for iOS 5.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
The icon wasn't the innovation obviously, just the article said Apple copied his icon. If he first copied Apple's icons, that's fair enough.
which is totally what she said
So they ripped him off, on a feature that was requested by thousands upon thousands of people the moment the -original- iPhone landed. Maybe everyone who bought a first gen iPhone and complained that it -didn't- do OTA sync should complain that he ripped off their idea?
Some people need to take their money and be thankful they got to play in that game at all for whatever time it lasted.
Remind me again why anyone would invest their own time developing new iPhone apps?
Because iOS is by far the most successful mobile OS to develop for.
Wrong. Android is the most successful. Citation is here
Avoid the MS tax, always buy I.B.M. PC's (I Built-it Myself)
Hey old CPU dude! I used to have one of those in my first "PC" a VIC20. Actually I'd say of the two MSFT is actually like a big old sweaty care bear compared to Apple right now. At least you don't need anybody to approve your app on Windows or WinPhone as far as i know. Meanwhile i'm betting in three years or less you'll see OSX phased out for iOS in laptop form factor, then if you want to use any Apple device it'll be Steve's way or jailbreak and void your warranty. Oh and after the shitpile that was Vista they actually got one right with 7, shocking I know.
But to me this is a perfect example of the difference between the two companies. Even if, lets say for the sake of argument, that Apple already had a similar idea a brewing, if this would have been MSFT they would have simply bought the guy out as the bad publicity isn't worth the hassle not when the guy could have been bought off for less than the interest these guys make in a weekend. Hell MSFT would have thrown him a few bucks, offered him a nice little job, maybe made him an MVP or something, basically they'd have come out looking like nice guys.
Sadly as you have pointed out since Steve got sick the first time Apple has been copying old Bill and his "kill crush destroy!" bad attitude that made MSFT so hated in the 90s. Nobody minds if you end up #1 as long as it doesn't look like you are getting there by stomping on the little guy. MSFT caught hell for this very same shit over Stacker/Doublespace, but notice how many iFanboys come out to apologize for Apple? I guess that thing about Apple users brains and the brains of religious zealots being the same must have some merit, huh? Because be honest, if you replaced the name Apple with MSFT and left every other word the same the hate would be ass deep in here!
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
ExeStore
ProgStore
ProgramStore
SoftStore
SoftwareStore
Amazon-Amazing-Multimedia-Web-2.0-Program-Store-in-the-Cloud
For the last fucking time, you cant compare all of android to just the iPhone, you have to include all iOS devices.
Also, in general iOS users are more willing to spend money on applications making it a much more attractive OS for developers to target if they want to actually get paid for their work.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
My question is, why hasn't Apple had the ability to sync the iPhone with iTunes over WiFi from the beginning? If anybody tried to patent such a thing, wouldn't we all be ranting about how obvious and un-patentable it was? I just don't think this functionality can be considered an "idea."
"Good artists copy; great artists steal."
Just recently, Android has reached 100 million units. Also, just recently, iOS has reached 200 million.
Did you even read the first paragraph of your citation? It only compares Android to iPhone, and it only compares them in the US!
For the love of God, the name of the app is "WiFi Sync". What the fuck else are they going to call an app that syncs over WiFi?
For the love of God, the name of the store is "Amazon Appstore". What the fuck else are Amazon going to call their store that sells apps?
Appstore is a trademarked marketing term. WiFi Sync is the name of an app. Different ball parks. Not that I don't think the Appstore suite is ridiculous.
The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
May 5th 2010 to June 6th 2011 is hardly a week.
That's not really relevant though. I see no issue with Apple copying something obvious and useful. But blocking third-parties from implementing it and then a year later announcing precisely the same thing seems clearly anticompetitive to me.
Apple was a struggling company right before they stole the patent for the "IPOD" a very well documented thing. Now as a company Apple steals idea from people that try and summit apps to their app store or even other companies. Heck IO5 should be called a Zune update.
Apple banned that app that let you use the volume button to snap the photo, giving a more traditional feel to using the camera feature. I believe they cited that it violated some bs in their big list of bs. Now they're implementing it.
Apple is a big group of a-holes...news at 11.
Because while it's their sandbox and the rules are more restrictive that those of other sandboxes it is an extremely profitable sandbox to develop in, even with the restrictions. $2.5 billion-dollars-of-profit to developers (after Apple's 30% cut) sort of profitable. Clearly not everyone is running into a problem of "most of the money to the distributor, and pennies to the actual innovator" (seriously!? Do you even proofread what you write?!)
What else was Apple going to call WiFi Sync? And what other icon would it use instead of a conglomeration of its OWN two icons for ... guess what? WiFi and Sync! Imagine that?!
Said icons on the left and right of http://grab.by/akrk
It's not that fucking tool's icon at all. Jesus.
"Those who don't study history... "
Microsoft did this same sort of thing - it turned out to cost them a bit of money. See Stacker for a prime example. Hope Apple doesn't mind writing a few checks.
My point is that the app has existed for a while, yet also according to slashdot Android has had wireless syncing since the beginning, so one of them must have "been first" if it's a legitimate claim to call wifi syncing an innovative feature that could only have been arrived at by copying.
Apple haters were all over the iOS 5 update saying the feature was copied from Android. Now it's... copied from this guy? So did he copy it from Android?
Or is this another "it's an obvious idea so really is it copyable?" discussions that also permeate slashdot?
I'm just curious. There's no doubt it was a "me too" feature added to iPhones (although the underlying wireless sync ability has been there for ages - it's how the app worked, via undocumented API calls), but is this a case of someone deciding to paint your car red as an aftermarket feature and then complaining when the manufacturer offers red as a stock colour in the new model year?
This. Obvious functionality is obvious. Apple should give this guy a million+ for cluing them in on something that should have been there from the beginning.
How about Ama-app? Kindle-App?
Well, the reason the app worked in the first place was because it used undocumented APIs put there by Apple as part of their own, unreleased, wireless sync system. The ability has been in iOS for a long time (and Apple has used it in other products), he simply decided to add it third party-style to the iPhone by using what Apple was already planning to use in iOS 5.
I'm not saying Apple is blameless, but the rules state /. os very much on the other side of the semantic debate "it's buying something... but on the internet"]
* no duplication of core function (and this is "syncing, but over wireless") [compare to slashdot stories where
* no calling of undocumented APIs
New Offer http://goo.gl/iTmFR
Um, the app violated the SDK, which is basically Apple saying "we reserve that stuff for our own core functionality, now or in the future." And the Logo? nope, those are two of Apple's existing logos, and the industry standard for wifi and sync, so sorry college boy, go cry to your fraternity bros.
1. Microsoft did it. So it isn't original.
2. He created an app that did things Apple told its developers not to do and he is surprised that part of the reason may have been because Apple wanted to do it themselves?
He should be happy he was able to have sometying profitable on Cydia for so long and that should be it. Seriously, it's like tethering, why would anyone think this feature wasn't coming to iOS? Of course it was!
The logo is all I'd credit him with.
WP7 still checks over apps that are submitted, but they're nowhere near as strict as Apple. It's basic "nothing that's illegal/carriers don't like etc.", AFAIK.
For the last fucking time, you cant compare all of android to just the iPhone, you have to include all iOS devices.
Yeah, right, I have to include iPads and iPods as they are mobile too. Well, then, Windows is the most successful, as I see hundred of millions of windows laptop and netbook everywhere. And I think I have seen a Zune once. Just once.
Avoid the MS tax, always buy I.B.M. PC's (I Built-it Myself)
they coulda called it WLANSync? Sync-ify? a billion other names that are not the exact same as somebody else's app?
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
One of the first action Apple took when creating the iPhone was to make an agreement with Ericsson for a number of cellular patents.
Yes, when talking about targeting a platform, you have to include all the reasonable targets. iPod touches and iPads are reasonable targets (and Apple TV is not, even though it's part of the platform).
Windows isn't a mobile OS, it's just an OS, but this isn't an argument I'm not going to get too far into. Pick whichever label you want, but you know what I mean. Of all the "app" OS's, the ones for touch-screen handheld devices, iOS is about double the size of Android in pure installed base, and is the most successful one to develop for.
If you want to stick with the "Windows on notebooks counts" line, then iOS becomes second in units, but Android bumps down to third. As for netbooks, iOS has long since surpassed them.
If you want to look at Windows on mobile devices, look at the success of UMPCs and Windows slates/tablets. It has made incursions into the mobile realm, but not fared very well (to put it kindly).
Okay, there are many apps out there that does syncing wirelessly. So I think rule one is out of question: iOS didn't have that particular feature that was made available with that app, the app provided a feature that was not yet part of iOS.
So I think the only way it could've failed was because of the second rule you state.
Democracy is for the people; you only vote once per season and we'll do the rest of the work for you don't have to.
Big difference. Microsoft actually used Stacker's code.
This is Apple implementing a similar feature *in a completely different way*.
Apple has done similar things plenty of times before. See Spaces, see Dashboard, see any of a dozen other functionalities Apple implemented in the core OS after similar-to-near-identical independent utilities existed. It's called "people want a feature - that feature is implemented by third parties now - but people want it built-in, so we built it in."
Apple will tell this guy to buzz off, and he will.
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
The purpose of that site was not known.
Now, explain how the Stac/DoubleSpace lawsuit is relevant to the topic at hand. And Apple doesn't mind writing a few checks. They do so all the time. They buy products, hire people, and license technologies they think will improve their products.
For example, they asked the WiFi Sync guy for his CV. They hired the notifications guy. The WiFi Sync guy just has sour grapes.
Nobody ever said Apple software was perfect or bug-free -- no software is. But you can be sure that their development has been far more rigorous than anything a student would do.
Lastly the offering from apple is not the same kind of wireless sync that the App author created, it Syncs not to a users computer, but to the cloud, along with allowing even iOS upgrades with wireless..
Incorrect. Apple is introducing wireless sync in that when your iPhone comes in range of the wireless network your PC running iTunes on it will automatically sync with it over WiFi, removing the need to connect to the PC with a USB cable. iCloud is something completely different again.
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
This is Apple implementing a similar feature *in a completely different way*.
If by "different" you mean "absolutely identically", yes.
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
They also check that it doesn't contain any porn, that it doesn't crash, that it does what it says, no violence unless it's declared, no bad language...
Actually, they pretty much check for whatever Apple check for, minus a few things.
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
Let's not forget the Camera+ app, banned by the App Store for its use of using the volume keys as a shutter button.
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/08/12/camera-pulled-from-app-store-for-volume-button-as-camera-shutt/
And now Apple is incorporating the concept into the built-in Camera app in iOS 5:
http://www.apple.com/ios/ios5/features.html#camera
Banned for potentially "confusing" customers, but evidently not so confusing for their own version in iOS 5. Go figure.
It is a matter of development priorities. Apple surely did not want to make significant changes to itunes before doing their planned move to the new (well now old) framework and 64-bit. Why do the work twice. So you wait on a feature that was not such a big frigging deal anyway.
And you should read the reviews on this turd of a program..
SO you have some evidence they used the same code. All the guy did was put a front end on their APIs and do some garbage on the desktop. Since his does not even work right, lets hope they did not use the code.
Apple steal someone's idea again. Approx 1 year ago they steal idea on nice game from Polish student. Apple fail again.
Recipes for USA bankrupt - http://tinypaste.com/0d66f dd = dollar deluge (printed in the infinity)
even though they came out with it over a year afterM.
Because in a company the size of APple a feature like wireless syncing takes ~2 years from development to delivery.
For Apple the figure is very probably much longer as unlike other companies they seem to engage in many more product iterations before delivery.
When you leave high-school and enter the real world you'll soon come to realize how long companies take to delver even what seem like simple products.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I didn't say they used the same code, because I would not be able to provide evidence of that, not having access to either source code. What I was saying is that it is functionally identical (does the same thing), in response to node 3 claiming that it does something completely different.
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
"Name one phone before the iPhone that had random-access voicemail?"
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=CallWave+Announces+Free+Visual+Voicemail+for+Mobile+Phones%2C+Nationwide
most of those press releases say Jan 18
Iphone was announced Jan 9 and released June 29 2007 (per wikipedia)
so.. there!
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
bill and the other micro$oft geezers are beaming
If nobody buys apps on other platforms because of Apple leveraging of their power, that would be one thing. I doubt you'd have an easy time proving that to be the case though.
People choosing not to for other reasons does not constitute a legitimate cause for legal action. The fact that Apple has control of the marketplace where the majority of applications are sold for a platform that does not dominate the market doesn't mean a thing in any meaningful legal sense.
It used to be rich in news for nerds, now it's only rich in news for Apple haters, toy bois and "How dare drop support for ?! 10 of us in the 6 and a half billion monkeys still use it for mission critical gaming. Can't even bother logging in to say goodby.
Rod. If you believe they have, then as long as you have deep pockets see a first rate patent lawyer. My wife Sarah Crewe (then a designer) and I attempted to sue Jigsaw and a raft of companies who 'knocked off' her original designs in the eighties and nineties but gave up due to funding even when we were right. Even in those days it was £1500 to see a silk! Itâ(TM)s not only the principle, itâ(TM)s your living! Fortunately the law has been improved, though too late for us. Good luck, If you need help. contact me. B Cowell
I'm talking about disgraceful, amateur-level code from Apple in programs as basic as their Finder. Your mention of "perfect or bug-free" is a straw man. You talk about students' inability to test sufficiently. Proper testing on Apple's part would have avoided these disasters. They are still shipping bad, insufficiently tested code, as if they either learned nothing from their past embarrassments or simply don't care. "you can be sure that their development has been far more rigorous than anything a student would do" - demonstrably false.
*Cough* Fanboi *Cough*
It's probably not amazing, but I would trust Microsoft today far more than I would trust Apple.