Orly? I wasn't aware that Mac Bots were so common. Do you have any additional information on these Botnets that you have discovered? You'd get a lot of credit in the security community if you were to disclose it.
I hate a... walled garden as much as the next guy...
I really wish that the "walled garden" metaphor would die. A walled garden, in the horticultural sense, provides no restriction to the freedoms of those wishing to enjoy it. It merely protects the garden from the elements. Is that really what you had in mind? I know that the phrase is being widely misused in technology circles, but we can rise above that, can't we?
I'm curious: How did this comment get modded insightful? There's no mention of the specifics of the patent, but numerous references to fellatio. If that's your primary area of interest, there are other forums with a lot more information on the subject. I'm sorry, but I don't want to discuss this subject any further - it leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
On topic, this is a patent for a specific method of application switching from the phone app while maintaining phone call it does not cover all methods of achieving this, or the general concept of multitasking. The arguably novel part is the response of the application that is being switched to - the menus of said application change in the context of the ongoing phone call to provide an easy method to return to the call. Obvious? Maybe, but that should be the discussion point here.
Of course, Apple was not behind this. It was my dog.
Because he's known to sue everyone (using retarded design patent claims), and he is gaining a lot from this.
Bad dog.
This was a complaint filed under criminal law. The complainant has not been disclosed. Does your dog have a history of filing criminal complaints? Does Apple? Does it matter? Or are you just happy to post the same ill-informed nonsense in any event?
The third article has an update stating that Apple didn't litigate this case, but MAY have been behind the original complaint. Surely we need something a bit more substantial than this before we break out the standard pro/anti-Apple rhetoric?
Actually, I merely bristle at the willingness of a large section of the tech community to deride Jobs as "bad person" and laud Woz as "good person" - an assessment not accepted by Wozniak himself. We don't know these guys; we read stuff from guys who don't these guys, that may or may not be accurate - I just think we should bear that in mind before making personal judgements. Screw Tommy.
Woz is just a nice guy... Jobs wasn't a very nice person. Not only do I understand peoples' dislike of the guy, I share it. But I honestly can just never understand any strong negative feelings about Woz.
Do actually know or have any personal experience of either of these guys? If not, your opinion is no more useful than the negativity that you don't understand. You might as well post to tell us which is your favourite Power Ranger...
Well I'm glad I made your day brighter, but my comment wasn't intended as earnestly as you've taken it. I thought that would be implied by the parts that you edited out - including a (bad) reference to Zoolander. I find the ongoing struggle between Apple and Samsung interesting, but Slashdot has become pretty tedious.
I'm genuinely confused. The article is about Samsung's alleged decision to attempt to ban sales of a currently unreleased and unannounced model of iPhone. Kurt555gs posts about how brilliant his Samsung phone is and concludes with the statement that he "can see why Apple has gone to the darkside of law suits."
What has that got to do with the article? We've done many articles on Apple's lawsuits. If you want to comment on their relevance to this development - great. But FFS, we can't just go on posting the same generic crap every time an article has the words Samsung, Apple or Android in the summary. Am I the only one who sees this? He's only got one look!
I bought a Samsung Galaxy S II GT-I9100. It is superior to the iPhone in any way I could measure. Android Gingerbread is smooth and seamless and has fixed the "chunkyness" of Froyo.
I can see why Apple has gone to the darkside of law suits.
Awesome. I'm sure your comment will be modded up, but how does your insight relate to the posted article?
Is it just the shape (and there were other devices that had a big glass front and buttons on the bottom of the screen).
Was it the placement of the icons? (a grid? really?
You seem to have replied to a post that you did not read, because you're asking questions that the post addresses.
Apple's problem with Samsung appears to be with the sum total of the Samsung products from hardware and software design changes made after the release of Apple products, packaging, marketing and advertising material copying the layout of Apple's advertising material. Now whether you agree that Apple has a case or that legal proceedings should be used to address these complaints is another matter. But Samsung's nods to Apple's design success were widely commented on in the press before Apple kicked off legal proceedings. So no, it's not just Apple and its "fanboys" who have perceived the similarity. Claiming that you can't see it seems disingenuous to me.
“Google [... is] clearly on the losing track,” [said] Florian Mueller.
Each time we see this name in an article we can be sure that most of the article is bullshit.
I don't really have an opinion on Mueller, but your selective quoting negates any point that you were hoping to make. Unless I've missed the joke?
> but there is no comparable experience on the PC that would have provided him with the same ease of creativity
The exact same app on the platform it originate from perhaps?
Its so funny how these Apple fanboys...
I have Garage Band on the Mac and it's a completely different experience. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you haven't used the iPad version. Try it out - you can create an entire composition from touch "smart" instruments. I'm not denigrating the Mac, but Apple have re-designed the iPad version around the touchscreen interface. It's a different product with a different focus.
To expand on #1, touch tablets are decent for information consumption, but not content creation.
My son is seven and has composed and recorded a song with Garage Band on the iPad. You're not going to hear it on the radio any time soon, but there is no comparable experience on the PC that would have provided him with the same ease of creativity. Content creation will come to these tablet devices - it's just a case of waiting for software writers to understand the platform and innovate around the advantages and disadvantages of a touch screen.
For example, don't wait for them to figure out how to access their email from their iPad to educate them about security, implement a secure container system like Good and tell everyone, "If you want to use your iPad to access work email, go to this website to set it up."
The problem with Good is that it doesn't actually integrate with the user's device - it sits on the top like an unsightly wart. We implemented it in our company and the initial "great, I can get email on my iPhone and iPad" has quickly turned into "why can't we have proper email and calendar access?" Usage (traffic) levels have fallen by more than half, but our licensing costs remain absurdly high for a product that offers little more than webmail on iOS. To me, this is the danger of the consumerization conundrum - if you attempt a half-assed compromise solution, you risk wasting money on a solution that no-one actually wants and users continue to search for holes to exploit.
You seem to be taking this a little personally. I'm not criticising the Xoom; I'm merely venturing a suggestion as to why the phrase "it just works" is more readily offered in relation to the iPad. If the Xoom "just works" for you, that's great. Ultimately personal experience is what counts. But a large proportion of iPad users would shy away from the solutions that you've alluded to in your post. The simplicity of the iPad backup isn't something to be dismissed.
I have a Xoom with Android 3.1. Could you tell me what about it doesn't "just work"?
Full automated backup - has this been implemented yet? I may be ill-informed or behind the times, but a colleague of mine was complaining about the series of manual steps that needed to be undertaken to perform a full backup of system, data and apps. He even made the suggestion that root access was required...
Feel free to shoot me down if this isn't the case. I don't own a Xoom myself.
Don't take it so personally. There's no FUD from Mika Mobile. Read his blog post - linked in the article - he's pretty positive about Android and developing for the platform. It's still just one guy's opinion, but I think you'd be happier if you read the original post and not the posted article or the submitted summary. The Android Defence League can stand down... The guy is OK.
"on iOS, user reviews for Battleheart average 4.5 stars (4000 total ratings), which is quite good. On Android it's a stunning 4.8, with 1000 ratings," writes the developer. "So not only is it reviewed more highly, it's also reviewed more often
It does not seem to be rated that much more highly, and it is certainly not reviewed more often.
From reading the developer's blog post, it's clear he's sold a lot more on iOS than Android. It's not clear from the linked article, but he's saying that Android users are more likely to give a rating for a purchased application. The 1000 Android ratings represent a larger proportion of sales he's had on Android, than the 4000 iOS reviews measured against the total sales he's made on that platform.
I'm assuming that Sophos is playing the role of Sylvester McMonkey McBean in this re-telling? The truth is that right now these Mac users would have been better off believing the "Mac is immune to viruses" myth. The fear of malware has made these users download and install malware to their Mac in an effort to protect themselves. Sophos is one of the companies that are aggressively marketing FUD on this issue. Frankly, their product is merely detecting and removing a competitor's product.
Slashdot Mirror
Orly? I wasn't aware that Mac Bots were so common. Do you have any additional information on these Botnets that you have discovered? You'd get a lot of credit in the security community if you were to disclose it.
I hate a ... walled garden as much as the next guy...
I really wish that the "walled garden" metaphor would die.
A walled garden, in the horticultural sense, provides no restriction to the freedoms of those wishing to enjoy it. It merely protects the garden from the elements. Is that really what you had in mind?
I know that the phrase is being widely misused in technology circles, but we can rise above that, can't we?
TL;DR
TL;DR
I'm curious: How did this comment get modded insightful? There's no mention of the specifics of the patent, but numerous references to fellatio. If that's your primary area of interest, there are other forums with a lot more information on the subject. I'm sorry, but I don't want to discuss this subject any further - it leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
On topic, this is a patent for a specific method of application switching from the phone app while maintaining phone call it does not cover all methods of achieving this, or the general concept of multitasking. The arguably novel part is the response of the application that is being switched to - the menus of said application change in the context of the ongoing phone call to provide an easy method to return to the call. Obvious? Maybe, but that should be the discussion point here.
Of course, Apple was not behind this. It was my dog.
Because he's known to sue everyone (using retarded design patent claims), and he is gaining a lot from this.
Bad dog.
This was a complaint filed under criminal law. The complainant has not been disclosed. Does your dog have a history of filing criminal complaints? Does Apple? Does it matter? Or are you just happy to post the same ill-informed nonsense in any event?
The third article has an update stating that Apple didn't litigate this case, but MAY have been behind the original complaint. Surely we need something a bit more substantial than this before we break out the standard pro/anti-Apple rhetoric?
Why is this tagged as "Apple", "iPhone" and 'iOS"?
Only way to get the fandroids interested in a submission - bait them with the prospect of Apple-bashing.
Tag a submission as "Android" and "malware" and the Apple fan boys will flock just as fast...
Actually, I merely bristle at the willingness of a large section of the tech community to deride Jobs as "bad person" and laud Woz as "good person" - an assessment not accepted by Wozniak himself.
We don't know these guys; we read stuff from guys who don't these guys, that may or may not be accurate - I just think we should bear that in mind before making personal judgements.
Screw Tommy.
Woz is just a nice guy... Jobs wasn't a very nice person. Not only do I understand peoples' dislike of the guy, I share it. But I honestly can just never understand any strong negative feelings about Woz.
Do actually know or have any personal experience of either of these guys? If not, your opinion is no more useful than the negativity that you don't understand. You might as well post to tell us which is your favourite Power Ranger...
For the record, I like Red.
Well I'm glad I made your day brighter, but my comment wasn't intended as earnestly as you've taken it. I thought that would be implied by the parts that you edited out - including a (bad) reference to Zoolander. I find the ongoing struggle between Apple and Samsung interesting, but Slashdot has become pretty tedious.
claims of their similarity are quite exaggerated - no sane person would confuse one for another.
No true Scotsman, eh? Bravo.
I'm genuinely confused. The article is about Samsung's alleged decision to attempt to ban sales of a currently unreleased and unannounced model of iPhone. Kurt555gs posts about how brilliant his Samsung phone is and concludes with the statement that he "can see why Apple has gone to the darkside of law suits." What has that got to do with the article? We've done many articles on Apple's lawsuits. If you want to comment on their relevance to this development - great. But FFS, we can't just go on posting the same generic crap every time an article has the words Samsung, Apple or Android in the summary. Am I the only one who sees this? He's only got one look!
I bought a Samsung Galaxy S II GT-I9100. It is superior to the iPhone in any way I could measure. Android Gingerbread is smooth and seamless and has fixed the "chunkyness" of Froyo.
I can see why Apple has gone to the darkside of law suits.
Awesome. I'm sure your comment will be modded up, but how does your insight relate to the posted article?
Is it just the shape (and there were other devices that had a big glass front and buttons on the bottom of the screen). Was it the placement of the icons? (a grid? really?
You seem to have replied to a post that you did not read, because you're asking questions that the post addresses.
Apple's problem with Samsung appears to be with the sum total of the Samsung products from hardware and software design changes made after the release of Apple products, packaging, marketing and advertising material copying the layout of Apple's advertising material.
Now whether you agree that Apple has a case or that legal proceedings should be used to address these complaints is another matter. But Samsung's nods to Apple's design success were widely commented on in the press before Apple kicked off legal proceedings. So no, it's not just Apple and its "fanboys" who have perceived the similarity. Claiming that you can't see it seems disingenuous to me.
“Google [... is] clearly on the losing track,” [said] Florian Mueller. Each time we see this name in an article we can be sure that most of the article is bullshit.
I don't really have an opinion on Mueller, but your selective quoting negates any point that you were hoping to make. Unless I've missed the joke?
> but there is no comparable experience on the PC that would have provided him with the same ease of creativity
The exact same app on the platform it originate from perhaps?
Its so funny how these Apple fanboys...
I have Garage Band on the Mac and it's a completely different experience. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you haven't used the iPad version. Try it out - you can create an entire composition from touch "smart" instruments. I'm not denigrating the Mac, but Apple have re-designed the iPad version around the touchscreen interface. It's a different product with a different focus.
To expand on #1, touch tablets are decent for information consumption, but not content creation.
My son is seven and has composed and recorded a song with Garage Band on the iPad. You're not going to hear it on the radio any time soon, but there is no comparable experience on the PC that would have provided him with the same ease of creativity. Content creation will come to these tablet devices - it's just a case of waiting for software writers to understand the platform and innovate around the advantages and disadvantages of a touch screen.
For example, don't wait for them to figure out how to access their email from their iPad to educate them about security, implement a secure container system like Good and tell everyone, "If you want to use your iPad to access work email, go to this website to set it up."
The problem with Good is that it doesn't actually integrate with the user's device - it sits on the top like an unsightly wart. We implemented it in our company and the initial "great, I can get email on my iPhone and iPad" has quickly turned into "why can't we have proper email and calendar access?" Usage (traffic) levels have fallen by more than half, but our licensing costs remain absurdly high for a product that offers little more than webmail on iOS. To me, this is the danger of the consumerization conundrum - if you attempt a half-assed compromise solution, you risk wasting money on a solution that no-one actually wants and users continue to search for holes to exploit.
You seem to be taking this a little personally. I'm not criticising the Xoom; I'm merely venturing a suggestion as to why the phrase "it just works" is more readily offered in relation to the iPad. If the Xoom "just works" for you, that's great. Ultimately personal experience is what counts. But a large proportion of iPad users would shy away from the solutions that you've alluded to in your post. The simplicity of the iPad backup isn't something to be dismissed.
I have a Xoom with Android 3.1. Could you tell me what about it doesn't "just work"?
Full automated backup - has this been implemented yet? I may be ill-informed or behind the times, but a colleague of mine was complaining about the series of manual steps that needed to be undertaken to perform a full backup of system, data and apps. He even made the suggestion that root access was required...
Feel free to shoot me down if this isn't the case. I don't own a Xoom myself.
FUD much, Mr. Mika Mobile "developer"?
Don't take it so personally. There's no FUD from Mika Mobile. Read his blog post - linked in the article - he's pretty positive about Android and developing for the platform. It's still just one guy's opinion, but I think you'd be happier if you read the original post and not the posted article or the submitted summary. The Android Defence League can stand down... The guy is OK.
It does not seem to be rated that much more highly, and it is certainly not reviewed more often.
From reading the developer's blog post, it's clear he's sold a lot more on iOS than Android. It's not clear from the linked article, but he's saying that Android users are more likely to give a rating for a purchased application. The 1000 Android ratings represent a larger proportion of sales he's had on Android, than the 4000 iOS reviews measured against the total sales he's made on that platform.
How about actually being a parent?
Sure, but Straw Men are infertile, so I'll hold off on the "insightful" mod myself...
I'm assuming that Sophos is playing the role of Sylvester McMonkey McBean in this re-telling? The truth is that right now these Mac users would have been better off believing the "Mac is immune to viruses" myth. The fear of malware has made these users download and install malware to their Mac in an effort to protect themselves. Sophos is one of the companies that are aggressively marketing FUD on this issue. Frankly, their product is merely detecting and removing a competitor's product.
Well presumably they are only going to copy the good ideas, not the stupid ones.
Not so. Apple's claim shows that Samsung have copied Apple's dock connector design too.