Apple Forces Google To Degrade Android Features

If it were Adobe by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-07 06:29 · Score: 2, Funny

You'd have to pay to be de-graded!

Kill Patents by pubwvj · 2012-07-07 06:29 · Score: 5, Insightful

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

Re:Kill Patents by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-07 06:37 · 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.
Re:Kill Patents by amiga3D · 2012-07-07 06:44 · 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.
Re:Kill Patents by cmdrbuzz · 2012-07-07 07:11 · Score: 2

Uh no, Motorola sued first.
Re:Kill Patents by gl4ss · 2012-07-07 07:13 · 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Apple has no problem with the manufacturers shipping MS products(cross licensing in place - with unpublished details).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.
Re:Kill Patents by jkrise · 2012-07-07 07:18 · Score: 3, Informative

Firstly, this article is about the tussle between Apple and Samsung's Android offerings. I very clearly remember that Apple started the mindlessness vs Samsung first.
Google was not directly sued by Apple, but the suits against Samsung and HTC were enough motivation for Google to acquire MMI and take some counter action.

--
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Re:Kill Patents by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-07 07:21 · 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.
Re:Kill Patents by __aaltlg1547 · 2012-07-07 07:30 · 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.
Re:Kill Patents by Tough+Love · 2012-07-07 07:34 · 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.
Re:Kill Patents by Tough+Love · 2012-07-07 07:41 · Score: 5, Informative

No, Apple sued first. The fact that Apple sued a different Android vendor than Motorola is immaterial, it was still a direct troll patent attack on Android.
2010, Mar 02: Apple sues HTC over 10 patents and files an ITC complaint against HTC over 10 other patents.

--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Re:Kill Patents by ninetyninebottles · 2012-07-07 07:56 · 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".
Re:Kill Patents by horza · 2012-07-07 08:06 · Score: 5, Interesting

There are plenty of morally wrong things people can do that are still legal. It's possible to harrass your neighbour in so many ways that just fall short of breaking the law, to the point they are suicidal, but if you don't do it then it doesn't mean somebody else will.
Apple are a morally bankrupt company, that got lucky in launching a product at the right time technological advances made it possible, then are using their extensive cash piles to destroy innovation. Business suffers, consumers suffer, the only winner is Apple being able to flog off their inferior technology for a couple more years whilst they censor their rivals from the marketplace.
Phillip.

--
Property for sale in Nice, France
Re:Kill Patents by Teun · 2012-07-07 08:30 · Score: 4, Informative

I see a couple of points re. the de-facto relation between MS and Apple that I agree with. These guys have a long standing truce, from around the time Apple helped MS make the Windows GUI and MS pledged to supply a MAC version of Office.
To name the most obvious.

--
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Re:Kill Patents by KingSkippus · 2012-07-07 08:32 · 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.
Re:Kill Patents by srw · 2012-07-07 08:49 · Score: 4, Informative

I think you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills. If, as requested by the AC poster, we travel back in time with him/her to a year ago... May 22, 2012 hasn't happened yet.
Re:Kill Patents by jo_ham · 2012-07-07 08:56 · 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.
Re:Kill Patents by bhagwad · 2012-07-07 08:59 · Score: 2

Apple should do what is good for users and what is right. This is neither good for users, nor is it right. It's not about legality or illegality. People shouldn't do business with companies that take advantage of the system unfairly.
Re:Kill Patents by Theophany · 2012-07-07 09:05 · 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.
Re:Kill Patents by Billly+Gates · 2012-07-07 09:54 · Score: 2, Interesting

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.
I know MS is still hated here with a passion, but Apple is much more evil. At least MS will coexist with Android and only ask a few dollars per device. Not go out all nuke and throw you out of business and go crazy!
I never in my years thought I would say this but I am glad crappy Windows won in the PC war of the 80s and 90s. Who knows what would have happened if the Mac one.
Yes Mac is superior but shit its creators are insane. Apple is turning anti consumer now just like MS as they build their monopoly. Want to replace that battery for your $1700 macbook pro? Throw it out and buy a new one!

--
http://saveie6.com/
Re:Kill Patents by Billly+Gates · 2012-07-07 10:01 · 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/
Re:Kill Patents by Karlt1 · 2012-07-07 10:43 · Score: 2

Apple is already dropping Google maps from IOS 6. Google testified before Congress that 66% of their mobile revenue came from IOS devices.
Google pays Apple 100 million a year to be the default search engine.
Re:Kill Patents by AmiMoJo · 2012-07-07 11:04 · Score: 2

Google pays Apple 100 million a year to be the default search engine.
Not according to this.

Google testified before Congress that 66% of their mobile revenue came from IOS devices.
Seems unlikely now there are more Android devices out there than iOS, and the gap is only getting bigger. Unless iOS users are more likely to click on ads or something, which also seems unlikely.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Kill Patents by gl4ss · 2012-07-07 11:30 · Score: 4, Interesting

Apple can't have total domination, they know that, there's always going to be some low margin devices from their age old competitor & factories that make their devices. they're fine with duopoly though, they know they don't have to fear windows phone that much and there's room for two on the market - but if both iOS and windows phone become niches among android versions that's bad business for both.
Strange modding on my post though. it's not a troll, just statement of current facts - thing is though if you're a ms fan or an apple fan you're going to get pissed at the truth. if it's a troll how come nobody was trolled? no counter arguments?
modding it overrated or off topic would be more apt if anything. these parties were suing each other just few years ago, but not that long ago they stopped that and all are aiming just making android less feasible - MS with demanding money from every android shipped and apple just outright gunning for blocking and the Nokia vs. Apple schism that could have caused trouble to Apple was brought to settlement after Nokia was brought to MS camp, the sums that were in public about that were so large they could have been used for short blocking, much more so than what Apple is using against nexus now, even oracles lawsuit could be seen as extension of that battle(even more so taking that Ellison is connected and was connected with Jobs). I'm not going to go all apk on it and start providing links for the things though, if someone wants consultation why I know all this and why it's true they'll have to look me up and pay relevant fees for my time - though it's all backed up by public news and documents, so I don't see why anyone who can google news articles would bother(not under nda's, no sauna talks, no bar talks - none of that sort led to these conclusions so I'm fine on that, can't sue me).
and this isn't even near the ugliest things going on in mobile business.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:Kill Patents by Rockoon · 2012-07-07 11:38 · 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."
Re:Kill Patents by olau · 2012-07-07 12:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

The sad fact is that it's probably easier to get Apple to behave than change the system.
Re:Kill Patents by Grishnakh · 2012-07-07 12:35 · Score: 4, Funny

Apple's corporate culture favors aggressive psychopaths. Microsoft's corporate culture favors incompetent and overweight psychopaths.
Re:Kill Patents by Grishnakh · 2012-07-07 12:40 · Score: 2

The PC was better because it had an open architecture and was expandable. The others mostly weren't. On top of that, the PC was cloned (because of its open architecture), making for much more competition. It's a lot better to have a crappier standard that you can get interchangeable parts from multiple manufacturers for, than a superior standard that you can only get from one place at an inflated price.
Re:Kill Patents by reub2000 · 2012-07-07 14:04 · Score: 2

as the entire concept of the smart+touch phone was still being hammered out
Is this what Palm had been doing for a while?
Re:Kill Patents by chrismcb · 2012-07-07 14:26 · Score: 2

The abusrdity is how often patents are given for something that isn't novel, or new.
Re:Kill Patents by chrismcb · 2012-07-07 14:27 · Score: 2

As a company, it is going to do whatever it can legally do to thwart its competition.

Apple might do that, but not all companies will do whatever they can legally do to thwart its competition.
Re:Kill Patents by oztiks · 2012-07-07 14:44 · Score: 2

It depends on what you call success, pre iPad Apple was just another big bad company on the market, after the iPad it was the biggest badest of them all.
Re:Kill Patents by walterbyrd · 2012-07-07 15:32 · 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.
Re:Kill Patents by Kartu · 2012-07-07 22:44 · Score: 3, Informative

Apple helped MS make the Windows GUI
Uhm, what? You mean they both "stole" GUI idea from Xerox?
Re:Kill Patents by repvik · 2012-07-08 00:04 · Score: 2

Apple is a company. As a company, it is going to do whatever it can legally do to thwart its competition.
It is not obliged to be an asshole. Other companies can do exactly the same, but they don't. Because they're not comprised of sociopaths. The problem isn't solely "in the system", but also in the companies that are immoral assholes. They're not doing something illegal. That doesn't mean that what they're doing is good.
Re:Kill Patents by Omestes · 2012-07-08 06:17 · Score: 2

You have a hard time selling shit to people who expect everything for free.
And who are these people?
I don't think you understand the market demographics. Android isn't for nerds, or geeks, or FOSS people, its for everyone. My father has an android phone, and he wouldn't know a kernel if it bit him in the ass, same for most of my friends (only 2 own iOS devices). My dad has spent far more on Android apps than I ever will, I'm guessing my friends are in the same camp (not being nerds, and not being free-software types). You really can't say, looking at market figures, that the nerds outnumber the "hip, affluent, Apple kids" by such a growing margin. If it was true, this indeed would be the year of the Linux desktop.
No, iOS and Android are just banal market choices, and have nothing to do with deeper underlying philosophies. Its like choosing between a Nissan and a Honda, it means nothing.
I have no clue whether people on iOS spend more than on Android, and doubt very much it is as deeply meaningful as people would like, there are a varieties of factors that would tie into that statistic. It also ignores people who have devices in BOTH ecosystems. My very non-nerdy father has an iPad and an Android phone, both fit different needs, and the iPad had better data plans on Verizon than any Android equivelent, his choice to buy it had nothing to do with Apple or Google, just individual needs.
I got an Android phone (and I AM a nerd), not because it was Google, or based on Linux, or... whatnot... I got it because I could side-load apps onto it, and i actually liked the UI more than Apple's (I'm sick of spit up cough lozenges being considered high design, it is boring). If Apple made a phone, or device, that meet my needs, I would get one. I don't care who makes it, I don't care whose brand it carries, none of that matters. I also don't care if it is FOSS or not, or made by nerdy neckbeards who like cheese puffs (hint, this applies to Apple too) or not. Hell, I'm interested in the x86 MS Surface tablet and if it is affordable or I get enough loose change I will grab one and sell my Transformer, and MS is even less nerdy and open than Apple.
It is about needs, and subjective expectations. Its just a bunch of plastic and chemicals, I don't see any reason to breath deep philosophy into it.
Pepsi or Coke? Who gives a shit.

--
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey

improvement by khipu · 2012-07-07 06:31 · Score: 3, Interesting

I actually prefer separate web searches and local searches. I find it annoying that the default Android search sends query terms over the web to Google, and I rarely if ever find the mixed searches useful.

As far as I can tell, I can turn off mixed global/local search, but I end up having to choose one or the other with the Google search app. Or is there some way I can get separate shortcuts for local and web searches?

Re:improvement by jkrise · 2012-07-07 06:50 · 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....
Re:improvement by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2012-07-07 06:54 · Score: 2

I haven't seen a "feature" this idiotic since Microsoft removed normal file name search and replaced it with a poor man's Google. Now I can't search for a file by the name I want, but it searches through all files on the whole god damned computer.

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.

Do net cheer any software patent victories... by SuperKendall · 2012-07-07 06:37 · Score: 4, Informative

This is just the kind of software patent that really strikes fear into smaller developers, since it's a technique that comes to mind naturally (I've had search boxes that have done mixed kinds of searches for decades).

I have never cheered "victories" even from companies I like, for any software patents... these truly are things that need to be abolished as patentable.

At this point though, I do not think the international community will allow it unless we get some REALLY strong support from government...

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:six hundred dollars? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-07 06:38 · Score: 5, Informative

If Samsung's profit margins are so slim on those devices that they cannot afford a few pennies for this patent, they are doing something wrong.

Can you be a bit more explicit about what you think this license fee is? And preferably cite a source for it? Because my understanding - and I'm happy to be shown wrong - is that Apple is suing not for a fee but to prevent the features being used.

Re:Didn't Google do this first? by gl4ss · 2012-07-07 06:39 · Score: 2

it's a feature from '90s.

the patent is a rehash combination of earlier patents.

also, nokia had this on mobile phones mid 'zeros I think. nobody fucking used it since it had couple of sucky points...

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.

Re:six hundred dollars? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-07 06:40 · 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

Re:six hundred dollars? by VMSBIGOT · 2012-07-07 06:43 · Score: 4, Funny

LOL; Gotta laugh when a search patent is being used against Google. Not saying anything on the merits, but still...

Why no voice maps on iPhone? by fermion · 2012-07-07 06:45 · Score: 2, Funny

I would feel sorry for Android users, but then I remember that iPhone has not voice directions. Android does on Google Maps. iPhone does not. Allegedly Apple pys more in license fees to Google than Google gets from Android. We know that MS probably gets more from Android than Google does. Google seems to playing an aggressive game, which is looking like a rear action. Bing is becoming acceptable. Apple is going to fight hard on maps, and probably give features that Google will not. Google is a trusted necessary brand for many people, no matter the platform. As it becomes platform specific, Chrome, Android, who knows what will happen.

--
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black

Re:Why no voice maps on iPhone? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-07 06:56 · Score: 5, Funny

Bing is becoming acceptable.
Bwahahahahahah....*catches breath*....hahahahahahaha...when can I buy your DVD?
Re:Why no voice maps on iPhone? by spire3661 · 2012-07-07 07:37 · Score: 2

iOS 6 brings turn by turn voice on their new, in-house map system.

--
Good-bye
Re:Why no voice maps on iPhone? by Asic+Eng · 2012-07-07 07:57 · Score: 2

Well Bing as a search engine is a joke. Bing maps is absolutely gorgeous, though. It's a shame they don't offer an Android app for it, because the bird's eye view is really nice, and it works in places (parks, trails, private roads) where Google street view doesn't. (Obviously I'm not buying an MS smartphone to use this, but if MS were to put their pathetic efforts in the mobile area to rest, and instead offer apps - that might actually work.)

Thanks Apple!!! by sensationull · 2012-07-07 06:46 · Score: 4, Funny

We all love you really, now die in a fire!!!

Re:Didn't Google do this first? by VMSBIGOT · 2012-07-07 06:49 · Score: 3, Interesting

Grep on Unix had this feature long before Apple was a company.

FTFY.

I think this is a good time to post... by SpaceWiz · 2012-07-07 06:57 · Score: 5, Interesting

this TED talk.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/johanna_blakley_lessons_from_fashion_s_free_culture.html

I think it's time to start calling technology utilitarian and start removing protections before this sector crashes...

Re:six hundred dollars? by Pringless · 2012-07-07 07:02 · Score: 5, Funny

If you have ever used any of Apple's products (especially OS X, iTunes or iOS) you know how great they are. They are also innovative to no end. Windows and Linux shows that innovation requires hard work and only Apple magically manages to do it. Apple is fantastic for this and deserves all the credit and patent fees.

patent thought by JimboFBX · 2012-07-07 07:10 · 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.

Re:Didn't Google do this first? by thePowerOfGrayskull · 2012-07-07 07:23 · Score: 5, Funny

Grep on Unix had this feature long before Apple was a company.

FTFY.

How does that work exactly?

grep "search term" /dev/mypc_and_theinternet?

Not true by daninaustin · 2012-07-07 07:34 · Score: 2

You don't know what you are talking about. In Florida, like most states, you can only shoot someone when in fear for your life. If someone comes in your house, you can probably shoot them, but if they are just trespassing in your yard, you will most likely go to prison.

Re:six hundred dollars? by Mitsoid · 2012-07-07 07:36 · Score: 4, Insightful

didn't google desktop also do searches for both ?

Re:six hundred dollars? by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2012-07-07 07:44 · 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

Re:Didn't Google do this first? by Spykk · 2012-07-07 07:52 · Score: 2

Try 'wget slashdot.org && grep Apple *' in your home directory.

Prior art by jmerlin · 2012-07-07 07:53 · 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.

Re:Prior art by HarrySquatter · 2012-07-07 14:52 · Score: 3, Informative

How can Google Chrome be prior art to a patent that was filed 4 years before Chrome existed?

So the patent is to use Google on your phone by superwiz · 2012-07-07 07:54 · Score: 2

and it's being used against Google to stop them from selling phones. Yep. I agree. Apple really does not innovate. I mean, it takes quite a bit of imagination to come up with this argument.

--
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.

Re:Typical Apple Hater whining by Jackie_Chan_Fan · 2012-07-07 07:59 · Score: 3, Interesting

Apple thinks they're winning, when in reality they're losing.

Take a look around. I see more and more people complaining about Apple. I know someone who had a macbook pro that just broke. Apple wanted him to buy another. He looked at PC laptops and asked a friend of mine why PC laptops were so much cheaper and had the same if not better specs.

He now owns a pc laptop. He was a die hard mac user.

Apple is ridiculously controlling and overpriced. Users dont want that. Users want cool, so they put up with the fist fucking you get as an apple customer.

Re:"Worse" by Asic+Eng · 2012-07-07 08:00 · Score: 2

The connotation of "worse" is that it was already bad to begin with.

Fine it's not my native language, but come on: that's complete nonsense. How do you think "less good" is expressed?

Re:six hundred dollars? by TheRaven64 · 2012-07-07 08:04 · Score: 2

It's also bad from a security perspective, because it provides a channel that leaks information about local files to whoever is providing the Internet part of the search, and (if they're not using SSL) anyone who happens to be able to listen in on any network between the two of you.

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News

uh, the prior art was also Google's? by acroyear · 2012-07-07 08:06 · Score: 2

how the hell does that NOT reflect exactly what Google Desktop already did - search locally and search internet in same results set?

nevermind the obviousness of such an idea...

but then again, it isn't THAT obvious given that I don't think i've ever actually searched my phone before except while it was mounted as a filesystem on some other O/S...

--
"But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
-- Joe

Re:six hundred dollars? by lister+king+of+smeg · 2012-07-07 08:16 · Score: 2

why not try refuting it if it is wrong instead of demanding someone downmod them?

--
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.

Re:six hundred dollars? by mrbester · 2012-07-07 08:23 · Score: 5, Interesting

Windows has done this for years when searching for device drivers...

--
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"

Re:Typical Apple Hater whining by KingSkippus · 2012-07-07 08:43 · 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.

Re:six hundred dollars? by knarf · 2012-07-07 08:48 · Score: 4, Interesting

If Samsung's profit margins are so slim on those devices that they cannot afford a few pennies for this patent, they are doing something wrong.

Some people pay the mob. Some people fight the mob. Samsung - and now Google - has chosen to fight the mob. I think they are right in doing so. When it comes to paying the danegeld, rule one is 'never pay the danegeld'. Just ask Shakespeare:

"We never pay any-one Dane-geld, âfâfâfNo matter how trifling the cost; For the end of that game is oppression and shame, âfâfâfAnd the nation that plays it is lost!"

--
--frank[at]unternet.org

Re:six hundred dollars? by FloydTheDroid · 2012-07-07 09:07 · Score: 5, Informative

Really? If you think Samsung is some kind of angel then you're sadly mistaken because they've demanded their fair share of danegelds - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung#Price_cartels

Re:six hundred dollars? by clintp · 2012-07-07 09:11 · Score: 4, Informative

Not Shakespeare, Rudyard Kipling:

It is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation
To call upon a neighbour and to say: --
"We invaded you last night--we are quite prepared to fight,
Unless you pay us cash to go away."
And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
And the people who ask it explain
That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld
And then you'll get rid of the Dane!
It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say: --
"Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you.
We will therefore pay you cash to go away."
And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we've proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.
It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say: --
"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that pays it is lost!"
-- Rudyard Kipling, 1911

--
Get off my lawn.

That's fine by Zebedeu · 2012-07-07 09:26 · 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.

License to Search? by sanman2 · 2012-07-07 09:51 · Score: 3, Interesting

Licensing fee? For what? License fee to search your local device? This is patentable?

Good fucking grief! This reminds me of Amazon's patents on single-click ads.

The rotten bastards at Apple have patented ordinary concepts that they have no business patenting. There needs to be patent reform.

Next those bastards will patent the word "phone" so that anybody selling one has to pay fees to Apple.

Re:License to Search? by coastwalker · 2012-07-07 22:48 · Score: 2

The quality of patents is so low they are a joke. Good luck with expecting the China to aknowledge them

--
Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.

I still don't have to buy from them ... by Shivetya · 2012-07-07 10:35 · Score: 4, Interesting

having been an Apple fan for many years, owning multiple iMacs, Macbooks, iPod devices, and iPads, I am through with buying their products. Perhaps I should have stopped earlier but it just seems 2012 is the year when Apple jumped the shark.

--
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.

Re:six hundred dollars? by Stan92057 · 2012-07-07 11:08 · Score: 2

I'm not so sure patent reform is the fix. I think firing the people who give the OK its patented is the answer get rid of the incompleteness.

--
Jack of all trades,master of none

Re:six hundred dollars? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-07 11:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

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

Re:six hundred dollars? by hillbluffer · 2012-07-07 11:30 · 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.

Re:six hundred dollars? by RKBA · 2012-07-07 11:35 · Score: 2

Maybe it wasn't the gods who were listening. What makes you think he went to "Heaven"?

--
9/11 Eyewitnesses to Explosive WTC Demolition 1 of 2

Re:Kill Patents - Three Strikes by Zaelath · 2012-07-07 12:13 · Score: 3, Interesting

They should introduce a three strikes system, if you get injunctions and three or more of your patents are struck down, you don't get any more injunctions. You can still sue for damages after the fact, but no more blocking competitors with irrelevant tat.

I think that solves 90% of the problems with the current system. There's still the issue of needing the EFF to provide lawyers to people that aren't able to fight Apple/Oracle etc.. but they're not really that interested in those suits anyway, there's not enough money in the individual's accounts to pay the legal fees.

The entire system is broken by hweimer · 2012-07-07 12:48 · Score: 4, Interesting

Patent examiners are not stupid. But their performance reviews hinge on the number of patent application cases they were able to close. Rejecting a patent is much more time consuming than accepting it, because one has to justify it towards the applicants who are most certain to appeal the decision anyway, creating even more paperwork. So there is a strong incentive for any patent examiner to just rubber stamp with approval, resulting in the mess we currently observe.

The reason behind this lies in the fact that it is politically desired to artificially inflate the numbers of patents granted in a country, because that is widely seen as an indicator for innovation. And of course, that is just another instance of Campbell's law.

--
OS Reviews: Free and Open Source Software

Re:six hundred dollars? by Tough+Love · 2012-07-07 14:11 · Score: 2

Steve Jobs, in his own words said: "We have always been shameless at stealing good ideas"

He equally have said "we have always been shameless" and stopped right there.

--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.

Boycott Apple by walterbyrd · 2012-07-07 15:41 · Score: 2

Rotten Apple: Apple's lousy design patent lawsuits
By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols | July 5, 2012 -- Updated 23:47 GMT (16:47 PDT)
> Summary: If Apple continues to have its way it will be illegal to buy anything that looks like a tablet because it will infringe on Apple's “design” patent.
> In the last couple of months a boycott Apple movement has started. It started as a protest about working conditions in Apple's Chinese partners factories. But the banning of the Galaxy Tab seems to have given it new life.
http://www.zdnet.com/rotten-apple-apples-lousy-design-patent-lawsuits-7000000356/

Apple Granted Patent for Head-Mounted Display
By Christina BonningtonEmail Author July 3, 2012
> Google’s been flaunting its Google Glass prototype left and right, but it may not be the only company getting into the head-up-display business. Apple was granted a patent for a head-mounted display apparatus on Tuesday.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/07/apple-patent-hud-display/

Google Jellybean smokes Apple Siri
By Joe Wilcox | July 7, 2012
> But there's a strange twist here. Google removed important search functionality from Android 4.1 in response to US Patent 8,086,604, which Apple successfully used to gain preliminary injunctions against Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and Galaxy Nexus.
http://betanews.com/2012/07/06/google-jellybean-smokes-apple-siri/

Federal Court of Appeals denies Samsung’s stay request on Galaxy Tab ban
Kevin Krause | Jul 6th 2012 at 4:30pm
> After Samsung was denied a temporary lift of a ban on their Galaxy Tab 10.1 earlier in the week, the news isn’t getting much better. The US Court of Appeals has denied the Korean mobile manufacturers request for a stay on the ban issued by US District Judge Lucy Koh. With the ruling, Samsung’s only hope to get the tablet back on the US market is to reach some sort of licensing deal or settlement with Apple, an avenue that is reportedly being explored jointly with Google.
http://phandroid.com/2012/07/06/federal-court-of-appeals-denies-samsungs-stay-request-on-galaxy-tab-ban/

Android Win: Apple Blasted for Trolling, Sees EU Patents Decimated
Jason Mick (Blog) - July 5, 2012 3:10 PM
> "Obvious" patents should never have been granted, given prior art
> Apple, Inc.'s (AAPL) international quest to kill Android, not by competition, but by lawsuits hit a roadblock in the United Kingdom when a Judge ruled Apple's patents to swipe-to-unlock patents to be invalid due to obviousness and prior art.
http://www.dailytech.com/Android+Win+Apple+Blasted+for+Trolling+Sees+EU+Patents+Decimated/article25104.htm

Apple pulls out of EPEAT green registration, may not be able to sell computers to federal agencies
By Steve Dent posted Jul 7th 2012 2:18AM
http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/07/apple-pulls-out-of-epeat-green-registration/

How Steve Jobs Fooled the Leader of the Free World and His Opponents
In 2006 Samsung released the SGH-Z610, a phone that had a gesture based touchscreen, app drawer, front and rear facing cameras – the works.
http://theworldwarrior.com/?p=614

LG Prada
The LG KE850, also known as the LG Prada,[1] is a touchscreen mobile phone made by LG Electronics. It was first announced on December 12, 2006.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada

Re:six hundred dollars? by BitZtream · 2012-07-07 20:43 · Score: 2

Which is exactly what it does. It intercepts your Google.com search requests, does them itself, adds your stuff to the results and returns that to the web browser. Nothing was ever 'sent to google' to be leaked.

Knowing how something actually worked has never stopped anyone on slashdot from talking about the flaws it has.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager

Re:six hundred dollars? by Skapare · 2012-07-08 03:42 · Score: 2

Unfortunately, too many people think "innovation" means "first to make it". And that is not true at all. Those who do real innovation just happen to be first. But there are things that are not innovation, even though someone does it first. Whether something is or is not innovative is often a subjective matter. Innovating is creating something others generally CANNOT create. It is NOT creating something others just happened to not create (because they were busy creating something else). The test ... put some number of engineers who have never seen how Apple made their feature work, and give them the requirement to make that. If MANY can, then there is no innovation because we would have had this feature if we wanted it even if Apple did not. If NONE can, then it could well be innovation. THIS feature is so obvious and so simple it would most likely end up with ALL (the number of engineers) can make it. It is so fucking far from innovation that it should be a textbook example of something that cannot possibly be innovative.

--
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars

Slashdot Mirror

Apple Forces Google To Degrade Android Features

85 of 498 comments (clear)