Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Forces Google To Degrade Android Features

Posted by timothy on from the advancing-the-arts-and-sciences dept.

walterbyrd writes "The latest in the ridiculous saga of the patent dispute between Apple and Samsung, which has resulted in Samsung phones and tablets being banned from sale in the U.S. is that Samsung, with the help of Google, has been pushing out an over-the-air software update to make its phones worse. Yes, the OTA update is designed to take away a feature, in an effort to convince the judge that the phones no longer violate Apple's patents. The feature in question? The ability to do a single search that covers both the local device and the internet."

26 of 498 comments (clear)

  1. Kill Patents by pubwvj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Time to kill off the patent system. It has become absurd.

    1. Re:Kill Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think Apple should be killed first. I have never seen a worse bully or a sorer loser. The tech industry needs to rid itself off this idiocy of a company once and for all. With all the money they have, they have the power now to completely annihilate innovation in the entire tech World. Things were better when they did not have that kind of money power; atleast then they had the hunger to build better products. Instead of quashing competition in the Courts and with the FTC.

    2. Re:Kill Patents by amiga3D · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can't defend Apple's actions but then I don't need to. What they do is legal. The problem is the system. There will always be the Microsofts, Apples and Oracles of the world but giving them this kind of power is beyond stupid. If it wasn't Apple it would be someone else.

    3. Re:Kill Patents by gl4ss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can't defend Apple's actions but then I don't need to. What they do is legal. The problem is the system. There will always be the Microsofts, Apples and Oracles of the world but giving them this kind of power is beyond stupid. If it wasn't Apple it would be someone else.

      thing is, what Microsoft can't do they have Apple do. Either for fear of government interference(this is still a very large real threat for MS, but not to Apple due to legacy reasons and Apple owning just a small part of the desktop world) or fear of pissing up their manufacturers, some of which are only shipping windows phone as lip service to MS to keep them from litigating against their Android phones - and to reap money back from MS they have to pay to MS as licenses when shipping androids, by getting discounts on WP licenses.

      Apple has no problem with the manufacturers shipping MS products(cross licensing in place - with unpublished details). And Nokia has cross license agreements with said manufacturers so they don't want to stir the pot(and they're knee deep in frand licensing too, which Apple isn't).

      It's sort of a new age duopoly arrangement. Mere few years ago these players were busy litigating each other but now they're effectively married as far as patents and blocking each others products go, with cross licensing agreements between Apple, Nokia and MS going every way and even a patent troll created by MS and Nokia as a pool - and they all want android and the other manufacturers dead or under their control(Nokia maps as default win wp8 amounts to wp licensees effectively paying their competitor a small sum for every shipped phone, though again details are hidden). It's part of the system that has kept new handset manufacturers blocked from market despite foxconn being available as a manufacturing resource for anyone, the os being available for anyone, the parts sources being available for anyone...

      what's even more ridiculous is that multiple firms have patents for things which amount to being the same thing when executed. that's sick.

      anyhow, mixed local and web searches suck ass.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    4. Re:Kill Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While you are absolutely right that what they are doing is legal, it doesn't mean that they aren't also bad actors. Getting a patent on "searching local and remote content with one search, OMG on a phone" is - well - a corruption of a broken system and it was disingenuous to even file for that patent. Then, actually using said patent in a blatant attempt to prevent competitive sales is almost the definition of a bad actor. (I imagine the "war room" sessions at Apple as they look through all of their patents and look at all competing devices to try to find something to sue over). While it is legal, it is also reprehensible. Just because it is legal doesn't mean they need to act in bad faith. However, I do believe that they will continue to do it (and so will others) until such time as the ludicrous rules allowing patents on software features are abolished.

    5. Re:Kill Patents by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not the patent LAW that's the problem. They law says that a patent is for something that's innovative and that would not be obvious to a person skilled in the art (in this case, of programming computers). The problem is that this is a bad patent that should never have been granted in the first place. The problem lies with the PATENT EXAMINERS who ignored that portion of the law or were so incompetent in the field of programming that they didn't realize that passing the same data to an internet search engine that you pass to the search function on the computer or phone and then aggregating the results is obvious. The judge is supposed to presume that a patent is valid once granted. But it seems that in the area of software patents these days, that's an increasingly invalid assumption. Patents do get invalidated, but not often enough and often not before considerable damage is done to parties accused of violating patents.

    6. Re:Kill Patents by Tough+Love · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can't defend Apple's actions but then I don't need to. What they do is legal.

      It is also legal to be greedy and avaricious, and in some cases, immoral and unethical. Though legal, such behavior still needs defending.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    7. Re:Kill Patents by ninetyninebottles · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well said.

      Is that sarcasm? I can't even understand what the previous poster is trying to say. It seems like some sort of conspiracy theory involving Apple and MS, but the sentence structure is as torturous as the "logic".

    8. Re:Kill Patents by KingSkippus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Apple's patent has tons of prior art. Your passive aggressive attempt to defend Apple merely shows you what a fanboi you truly are.

      Yeah, it's got tons of prior art, but so the hell what? Until Google pays its pound of flesh in money and time to have it invalidated, that doesn't make a rat's ass worth of difference. That's not fanboyism, that's just the way the system works.

      Apple is a company. As a company, it is going to do whatever it can legally do to thwart its competition. If that means obtaining a patent that will at some point later be ruled invalid and then using it to temporarily take your competitor's products off the market, or better yet, get them to disable certain feature of it, that conveys a certain impression to a lot of your competitor's existing and would-be customers: that 1) your competitor cannot be relied upon to deliver said features, and 2) that your competitor is basically creating knock-offs of your superior product.

      There is a really damn good chance that this patent will be invalidated at some point--I'm hoping it during this trial. But the damage is done, and even though the patent isn't valid, Apple will have won a marketing battle from it.

      The GP is exactly right on the money: The problem is with the system. Blame Apple all you want for not acting in an ethical manner, but if you think it's acceptable to have a system in place that depends on companies acting ethically, boy are you in the wrong country.

      Even if Apple goes out of business tomorrow (fat chance...), the GP is also right that there will always be another company right behind them using the same practices to thwart its competition and get ahead. Even if somehow the plug was pulled on Apple doing this, what are you going to do about the 158 companies lined up right behind Apple to extract their pound of flesh from Google? Try to squash them too? Good luck with that.

      In the meantime, sane, rational people like the GP understand that the only way to solve this problem once and for all is to change the system so that it doesn't depend on companies being ethical. Take away their weapons, software patents, and we won't have to worry about Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, or anyone else using the shitty system like this any more, and companies like Google (and yes, Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, etc.) can focus more of their time, energy, and money on producing cool products instead of fighting these incessant court battles.

    9. Re:Kill Patents by jo_ham · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Got lucky launching *a* product at the right time?

      Are you thinking of the same Apple as I am? One is a fluke, any more than that and it's far more than luck. Whatever you think of Apple, attributing their rise from near-death into one of the biggest companies in tech down to luck is to severely underestimate your "enemy", if that's how you want to position yourself (given the rest of your comment).

      Perhaps this is why Apple have such an easy time of it. Their competitors think it's all down to luck and fanaticism.

      For the record: strongly disagree with this lawsuit.

    10. Re:Kill Patents by Theophany · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That and the fact that Apple doesn't give a shit about their desktop market. The fact that they're turning £2,000 laptops and PCs into oversized iOS devices is testament to this. As soon as they started raking in obscene amounts of money for handhelds (iPods, iPhones and iPads) they left their desktop products to fester and morph into an unsightly extension of their iOS division.

      Apple's corporate culture seems to favour aggressive psychopaths more than any other, we all know what a lunatic Jobs could be and Cook seems to be little different. There are times now where I long for the days of Ballmer dancing around like a chimp, at least we got a cheap laugh out of his chemically imbalanced grey matter.

    11. Re:Kill Patents by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can't defend Apple's actions but then I don't need to. What they do is legal. The problem is the system. There will always be the Microsofts, Apples and Oracles of the world but giving them this kind of power is beyond stupid. If it wasn't Apple it would be someone else.

      thing is, what Microsoft can't do they have Apple do. Either for fear of government interference(this is still a very large real threat for MS, but not to Apple due to legacy reasons and Apple owning just a small part of the desktop world) or fear of pissing up their manufacturers, some of which are only shipping windows phone as lip service to MS to keep them from litigating against their Android phones - and to reap money back from MS they have to pay to MS as licenses when shipping androids, by getting discounts on WP licenses.

      Apple has no problem with the manufacturers shipping MS products(cross licensing in place - with unpublished details). And Nokia has cross license agreements with said manufacturers so they don't want to stir the pot(and they're knee deep in frand licensing too, which Apple isn't).

      It's sort of a new age duopoly arrangement. Mere few years ago these players were busy litigating each other but now they're effectively married as far as patents and blocking each others products go, with cross licensing agreements between Apple, Nokia and MS going every way and even a patent troll created by MS and Nokia as a pool - and they all want android and the other manufacturers dead or under their control(Nokia maps as default win wp8 amounts to wp licensees effectively paying their competitor a small sum for every shipped phone, though again details are hidden). It's part of the system that has kept new handset manufacturers blocked from market despite foxconn being available as a manufacturing resource for anyone, the os being available for anyone, the parts sources being available for anyone...

      what's even more ridiculous is that multiple firms have patents for things which amount to being the same thing when executed. that's sick.

      anyhow, mixed local and web searches suck ass.

      It is a step beyond this with Apple. THey all agree not to use or do cross licensing and patent protection rackets with each other so if a third party comes in and sues they can combine forces and sue for defense.

      But not Apple. Apple is everyone MUST OWN AN IPHONE or no phone at all. Everyone who makes phones needs to go out of business or leave the market to Apple altogether. They are extreme and fanatical and wont stop unless everyone but Apple is out of business. You can't negotiate with them as they do not want your profits. THey want you out of the market so Jobs vision of him outdoing Bill Gates succeeds. Tim's Cook ego is more important than your needs to your device you paid for.

      I think anti trust laws need to go to Apple as this is beyond the equivalent of giving away IE 6 for free. This is more like if MS sued every OEM who dared include any other browser and used the FTC to ban the downloads and imports of every browser but IE 6. Apple is much more agresive and is using its money to block competitors from entering the market.

      --
      http://saveie6.com/
    12. Re:Kill Patents by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Mod parent up.

      All was fairly quiet in the mobile business due to what was essentially mutually assured destruction. Apples first successful entry into the mobile phone market brought with it an asymmetric patent playing field, as the entire concept of the smart+touch phone was still being hammered out and only a few players actually had lots of patents for this new market.

      Apple fired first and it took less than a year after that for the entire market to be ablaze with lawsuits.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    13. Re:Kill Patents by olau · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The sad fact is that it's probably easier to get Apple to behave than change the system.

    14. Re:Kill Patents by walterbyrd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > What they do is legal. The problem is the system.

      Do you defend all patent trolls, or just Apple?

      The system may have problems, but Apple chose to file all of those bogus patents, and Apple chose to file all of those bogus lawsuits. Apple should be held accountable for what Apple does.

      You are simply trying to deflect the blame from Apple, and that's BS. Just because the system is abusable does not mean that Apple is forced to abuse it.

  2. Re:six hundred dollars? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    paying for a valid innovative licence yes I agree.
    BUT a patent exists for a single search of local AND internet?

    This is classed as logical development and in any sane country isn't patentable. Searching local has existed for ages (but if a patent existed for that sure licence it), searching the internet is what google does... todo a search checking local and net is a logical evolution.

    Best thing is people just stop selling in america leave the locals to Microsoft and apple

  3. Re:improvement by jkrise · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Your personal views on the matter are completely irrelevant. That a company can be forced to remove a feature that it has provided in the desktop market for almost a decade, in order to not violate a patent that ought not to have been granted; vindicates Posner's views that the patent system is truly broken and absurd.

    --
    If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
  4. patent thought by JimboFBX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Shouldn't the patent be on how it's done and not that it's done at all? That's like patenting the concept of a machine that seperates fibers from its seeds and not actually patenting the cotton gin itself.

  5. Re:six hundred dollars? by Mitsoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    didn't google desktop also do searches for both ?

  6. Re:six hundred dollars? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    didn't google desktop also do searches for both ?

    Yeah, it did - and I found it quite annoying. And (tangentially related), before that, I remember Internet Explorer trying to blur the line between what was on the local machine and out on the web.

    I'm not an anti-patent zealot; but it seems pretty obvious ALL software patents need to be invalidated. I don't care what kind of capital Apple, Google, Microsoft, et. al. have wrapped up in them - this has gotten ridiculous.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  7. Prior art by jmerlin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google Chrome and Firefox at the least, before the iPhone ever did it, allowed you to search your own local history AND the internet from the URL bar. Local searches showed up in the preview, but if you hit enter, it would pass the search onto your favorite browser. Software patents should all be invalidated, IMO.

  8. Re:Typical Apple Hater whining by thesandtiger · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Weird. I know four people who just bought their first Macs because of the new display. Since I have more anecdotal evidence than you, that means Apple is winning.

    Seriously, though - nobody but geeks cares if a tech company is abusive. Most people who buy products couldn't care less about Microsoft back when and they couldn't care less about Apple now. Hell, companies have literally killed thousands of people before and nobody except crusaders gave a damn.

    This is not to say I think Apple is behaving well, but that unless Tim Cook literally eats a baby during halftime at the Super Bowl not may people will care, and even then probably not for long.

    But to say they're losing? They are making vast profits with a higher mark-up on products that really are fairly commodified now... That is hardly losing and that a few nerds are butthurt over their bad behavior isn't gonna change that.

    --
    Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
  9. Re:Typical Apple Hater whining by KingSkippus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I was in this boat. I was never a die hard Apple fan, but I did like their products. I had a MacBook Pro, an iPhone, an iPad, and two different models of iPod. Eventually, I just got tired of it. I got tired of the expense, I got tired of the smug "Just Works" banter even though I constantly had problems keeping everything synced up, I got tired of being told that I don't have rights to play such-and-such on so-en-so device, and so on.

    The straw that broke the camel's back was when I decided I wanted to write a little iOS app and applied to the Apple developer program. I sent my application and my $99. They sent me an e-mail saying they needed proof of my identity. I didn't like that--what the hell difference does it make?--but went ahead and sent them a copy of my driver license with the license number blacked out. (It's none of their damn business what my license number is.) They sent me another e-mail saying they wanted an unaltered copy of my id, and it has to be notarized. That was around the same time that a bunch of stories were hitting Slashdot about developers complaining about how long it was taking apps to be approved, about Google Voice getting smacked down, and Apple demanding that all of its apps be developed in Objective C.

    At that point, I'd had enough. I demanded by $99 back in a note telling them I'd decided to develop for Android instead and sold my MacBook Pro. I held on to my iPhone until the contract ran out, and last December, I bought a Samsung Galaxy Nexus, which which I have been absolutely giddy--it's a much better device, in my opinion. I still have the physical iOS devices (the iPhone and iPad) that I use to make sure web sites I work on work in iOS's Safari browser, but at this point, I'm not looking back.

    Apple lost a customer and a developer over their shenanigans, and furthermore, I recommend against buying Apple to my friends and family. I still think the company is very innovative and they have top-notch design teams. They're able to accomplish a lot of amazing things. But other companies these days are accomplishing amazing things too, and in the end, it's just not worth it.

  10. That's fine by Zebedeu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just make it an US-only "update" and don't bring this bullshit to the rest or the world, where the patent system isn't (completely) torn to hell.

  11. Re:six hundred dollars? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm sorry, but... fuck off. You lost me at "Apple feels with some justice".

  12. Re:six hundred dollars? by hillbluffer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Apple is not "innovative"; they're good at stealing ideas, repackaging, and selling them. Steve Jobs, in his own words said: "We have always been shameless at stealing good ideas" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU Yes, the selling is doggone hard work, and Steve Jobs was one of the best salesmen this planet will ever see. And I will concede that other companies do their share of stealing too. Examples can always be found if you dig hard enough. But in this case, with such an obvious idea that a patent should never have been granted for, it's "pot kettle black" to Apple, as far as I'm concerned.