So you do really think that Apple comes up with these great innovations
Um, yes, they actually *do* come up with their ideas.
Which is a rather ironic argument on your part, given that the patent in question is one that HTC bought from Google that they bought from someone else.
which only they could have come up with
No, I don't think they are the only people capable of coming up with their ideas. They are, however, the ones that did come up with them.
and that others are blatantly trying to steal!
In the case of Samsung and Google, absolutely. These two companies are blatant thieves. Samsung copies Apple hardware design so consistently that it would seem they have a whole department solely tasked with doing just that, and Google steals from whoever they need to in order to put out a product, like they did with Sun's Java and Apple's multitouch iOS.
Apple only cares about the sale of the product, not support
Sales of their products are affected by support.
that's why so many of their products fail 2-3 years off shelf life conveniently after warranty.
Then, why do so many *MORE* of their products *NOT* fail 2-3 years after warranty? You imply some sort of "planned failure" to get people to buy new products, but Apple (like most quality brands) take a different tact, and instead come out with new and improved products to entice new sales. And Apple, specifically, is having no problem whatsoever getting people to buy their new products.
That wouldn't happen if they kept failing on people.
And, what does this have to do with the story in question anyway?
Your reply is completely non sequitur. So obviously so that you must know that's the case, so I wonder, why exactly did you make that completely irrelevant reply?
To answer your question, with a more apt example, you patch the browser by clicking "Continue" in the window that comes up on its own (automatically configured to run via a mechanism similar to, but superior to, cron), then click on "Restart" (if necessary).
So, yeah, it's pretty simple. Much simpler than your non-relevant example. However, I'm still not sure what that's got to do with the post you replied to.
Except of course when they don't. When you create a culture of careless idiots by making them think they are invulnerable to any threats this is the only way to handle them.
Care to explain how this is a case of Macs not "just working"? Or how may "careless idiots" were adversely affected by this?
This looks like simple mindless anti-Apple trolling.
If they just came out and said "Yeah we got screwed too" they might have some credibility, but instead they have to act like something like this doesn't actually affect them and quietly sweep the dirt under the rug.
"Got screwed"? How, exactly? This is exactly how the system is supposed to work.
On the other hand of that is the legion of careless users that are made even more careless because they have been given the false belief that they are impervious to any kind of cyber threat. If they just said "Yeah all that 'most secure' stuff we've been telling you is utter nonsense" then they might lose a moron or two to the competition.
So, where are all the infected Macs? And where are all these people who say Macs are "impervious to any kind of cyber threat"? Straw men don't count, I'm talking about actual human beings.
The problem with you anti-Apple trolls is that you rail against an imagined Mac user being screwed over by an imagined Apple, neither of which *actually* exist. Apple isn't evil, Mac users aren't idiots. There are millions of highly intelligent, technologically adept people who use and prefer Macs. What's so difficult to understand about this? Just because a smart person likes a system you don't like, that's not an affront to you. There are smart people who happily use Macs, Windows, Linux...
They're probably trying to coax a few details out of you. You can resolve it so easy by just telling us:
And I have, countless times. But while you're probably right that he's trying to coax more details, starting from some invented point of view is not useful. And having to address it over and over again is tiresome.
What are a few examples of the patented features that Apple is claiming they 'own' that you forthrightly would agree they 'own?' Give the folks here an idea what ground you stand on. It doesn't have to be a huge amount of detail. What does Apple have the right to that the other companies are 'stealing?'
I shouldn't have to explain what is readily available online. But if you want an idea, just look at Android and smartphones pre-iPhone and post-iPhone. Look at tablets pre-iPad and post-iPad. Look at touch interaction pre-iOS and post-iOS.
People, like bhagwad, dishonestly misrepresent this as "Apple owns any rectangle with a touch screen" or other bullshit. There is no shortage of ways to design a rectangle with a screen. Most companies seem to have no problem with this except for Samsung.
The last time Apple tried this crap, in the touch-and-feel era when they sued Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard (for their NewWave object-oriented desktop which ran on top of Windows 3) they were ultimately thrown out of court. We're trying to make sure they don't pull that same sort of obstructionist crap again.
Your portrayal of history isn't terribly accurate. Apple's lawsuits weren't entirely dismissed. They did end up learning that copyright didn't apply to look and feel, which is why they are using patents now. The last of their lawsuits against MS were settled in 1997.
As for "this crap", Apple paid for the rights to Xerox's work, and expanded upon it themselves. Macintosh (and Lisa) were completely new ways of interacting with a computer. It's perfectly reasonable to think that Apple should have the rights to the fruits of their labor, and this isn't just "graphics and a pointer and windows", it's specific ways of interacting with these things, just as the Android lawsuits aren't about generalities like so many here seem to think, but about very specific ways of interacting. There are plenty of alternate ways available for Google to come up with.
But they don't. Google is the ultimate technology photocopier. They rarely come up with something new, they just rehash other people's work. Their only real innovation in their consumer products is that they make them free.
On the other hand, they are very innovative in their actual product, which is mining data and serving up ads.
This thread is about Google's lie that they would never use a patent offensively.
Okay. So we have to agree. Google is starting to act as shitty and unethical as Apple and Microsoft customarily do.
We don't agree. I don't think that protecting your property is unethical or shitty. And it's not like this is some new thing on Google's part, it's just a more blatant example that stands out in contrast to their recent public statements
Interesting that you say Apple only POSSIBLY STOLE and yet Google STOLE... has anything gone through courts yet?
Because I haven't seen the Google patents HTC paid for in this discussion.
Are you also concerned about the double standards that Apple is displaying? e.g.: "We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas." -Steve Jobs "Good artists copy; great artists steal." -Steve Jobs
-Picasso
Jobs (and Picasso) are using the word "steal" in a different manner here. But they are also honest about their actions.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt but you sure come across like you have an Apple bias.
I do like Apple and their products.
Google is fighting back with patents as they should, I suspect they would prefer they didn't have to so if they now come out and say "we will use our patents to defend our products", would that make you happy?
If they said they would use patents to protect their products *and* they quit trying to play the patent victim card, all hypocrisy would be absolved.
No, I don't believe Google is perfect and I do not believe they are still living up to "do no evil".
The first part is a straw man. No one is claiming Google or Apple are perfect. The second part is all but meaningless. "Evil" is a silly term to use, and not the basis for a reasonable general discussion about tech companies.
To quote you: You work within the system you have, not the system you wish you had. That is precisely what Google is now doing.
And I have absolutely no problem with Google doing that. I just wish they would be honest about it.
Cathedral vs. Bazaar. Some of us may remember the gcc/egcs split or the emacs/xemacs saga, where FSF packages were developed in secrecy until they were released (sound like Android?).
No, because Android source isn't released even after the product ships. That's the whole premise of this thread.
Calling these patent infringements on either side "stealing" is flat out silly.
It's well-established that one can "steal" and idea.
Though if you want to call it that, then apple stole from google and HTC
Quite possibly.
apple started shooting first then google gave HTC a gun to start firing back
Only after Google stole from them. But that's not even what this thread is about. This thread is about Google's lie that they would never use a patent offensively. I'm really not bothered that Google is protecting their property. In fact, it's exactly the sort of thing they *should* do.
But I do care that they play a double-standard here and blatantly lie about it.
Right now in the mobile phone industry, EVERY possible conceivable invention, and several inconceivable ones are covered by multiple patents owned by multiple different companies. The only way to defend in the industry is to respond back, oh I'm infringing on 4 of your patents, oh yeah well your infringing on 4 of mine also, we both break even with just a few billion down the drain in lawyer fees, any company must either do that, or just say oh my bad I'll stop selling phones. Just flat out dropping out isn't an option, they are in it way to deep, so all that can be done is to assist the companies making their phones by preventing them from getting steamrolled.
Wait a minute - you actually believe that Apple comes up with these great new designs and ideas and these evil other guys are blatantly "stealing" those wondrous innovations that no one except Apple could possibly come up with? Like the square design for a tablet?
Please tell me that's not what you believe.
It's not what I believe.
Why do you guys insist on making shit like this up?
Except that's not what's happening. Apple invented iOS and the iPhone and iPad. They feel that Android in general has copied parts of it that they own. How are they the "bad guy" for protecting what they own?
They aren't "tying up" the competition. They are telling the competition to come up with their *own* products.
Are you _really_ suggesting apple should have the right to all things touch screen and square with rounded edges?
No, and no one else is suggesting this either.
Nothing you ever come up with is completely original. It all builds from your prior experience with other things. This is how people learn and progress.
Irrelevant.
So you think apple and windows shouldn't have ever existed too? because xerox should have patented their display system and kept it locked down to extremely expensive business systems for 20 years?
Where do you get these straw men?
People don't like your idea because it stifles progress by decades.
First off, it's not my idea. Second, *people* like patents. It's only a bunch of whiny little bitches on nerd forums that dislike them.
You work within the system you have, not the system you wish you had.
To make the obligatory car analogy, you and I both have dirty cars but own buckets, rags, water and soap. Both of us realize putting water and soap in the bucket, then using a rag to wash the car would get the car clean. You think of it a little bit before I do, or perhaps run off to the patent office first, and I now can't wash my car for the next 17 years, or have to pay you every time I do.
Yes, and that's exactly how it's supposed to work, assuming no prior art.
Why do nerds seem to think that patents are only supposed to cover things that no one else could possibly think of?
People would get much less bent out of shape if patent quality wasn't such absolute crap and getting crap patents overturned wasn't expensive.
*People* aren't getting bent out of shape. Nerds (a subset of "people" in general) are, and really just a subset of those.
I assume you are one of those apple consumers that has the religious parts of their brain activated when thinking about Apple.
And I'll assume you're a troll for using such an absurd argument.
Google is not trying to destroy apple, just trying to stop them destroying the smart phone/tablet market...which is their aim.
Um, no. Apple is just telling Android handset makers to come up with their own stuff. Google, on the other hand, is trying very hard to legitimize their 'theft'.
So in other words if you try to break my arm I am damned well going to break yours first if I can, or at least subdue you!!
No one is saying Google doesn't have the right to "fight back". That's not the issue. The issue is that they are doing exactly what they said they never would do (and that so many Slashdotters like to reference in an attempt to make Google seem like saints).
On the topic of things like keychain syncing going away, I suspect that the equivalent functionality isn't going away, but that the specific MobileMe keychain syncing is going away, and that Lion (and maybe even iOS) will use iCloud instead.
Right, because telling people the problems about the technology and saying that people shouldn't buy it based on these problems is bad? Last I checked, that was called an opinion.
Except that's not what the OP was doing. He was trying to act like his opinion was relevant to everyone.
"Even for people who don't care about the source, shoving games into a SaaS model is simply screwing consumers."
In typical nerd fashion, he wasn't content to give his own opinion, but he has to somehow make it out to be the opinion that *everyone* should have.
By that right then shouldn't Palm being suing Apple's ass? After all we are talking about a rounded square with cute little icons, that pretty much describes every Palm Pilot I have ever held in my hand.
Are you saying an iPad looks just like Palm? Because both look quite different.
But this is pretty much the problem with the whole patents and copyrights mess. they allow shit that is so damned vague you might as well patent 'A thing about some stuff' because frankly there ain't no way in hell anyone is gonna mistake a Galaxy for an iShiny.
The Galaxy Tab and some of the Galaxy phones look almost *exactly* like an iPad and iPhone.
No this is just more proof that Apple without Jobs sucks ass.
I didn't realize these lawsuits just came out over the past week or so! I was under the impression that they were launched while Jobs was the CEO...
No I have a feeling we are gonna see more of this shit as the company slowly slides downhill without the man behind the big desk.
Yeah, right, because Apple is doing so poorly. What planet do you live on?
Just like the last time it'll coast for a couple of years with what they have in the pipe but the dumb moves and bad plays that hurt their rep are already showing up.
Wait, are they declining or coasting?
But this is all nonsense, of course. It's not like you've been praising Apple and Jobs all this time, and only now see some sort of "decline". You've been making these sort of claims for at least over a year now, and this is just the latest excuse to fit your preconceived notions.
How many times do you have to be wrong before you get a clue that some of your fundamental assumptions are flawed? Apple is flying high, and quarter after quarter they go higher and higher. Yet, for some people, somehow it's always *this current* quarter is the apex of their growth. And they're always wrong. You'd think eventually guys like you would get a clue and maybe actually wait for *ACTUAL* signs of decline before running at the mouth like a raving lunatic.
Here's a clue for you: there's *ALWAYS* going to be something you can point at to say "look here, this can be a cause or sign of Apple's decline". Always. So if you run around looking for reasons to proclaim Apple's impending doom, you'll find it. But that doesn't mean that they actually *are* in decline. Didn't you ever hear the story of Chicken Little?
Call me crazy, but that seems to me like he's placing the blame squarely on Android there.
Ok, you're crazy.
He wasn't blaming Android, he was blaming Richard for using a stock Android setup. You're being incredibly dishonest to pretend like ScrewMaster was blaming Android, especially when he said, "I was telling him that he could, with very little effort, make it closer to what he would like, to make it better suit his own preferences. Android allows you to do that, Apple does not."
In other words, Richard just needs to put in a little more effort, and Android allows that while Apple, somehow, does not, which is strange given that Richard seems to prefer iOS, so it's hard to see how Android could allow him to make the phone closer to iOS, but Apple cannot.
It's a classic case of cognitive dissonance. Mistaking one's own opinions for universal truth, then applying reason incorrectly as a result.
Still, I don't see how ScrewMaster was placing any blame on Richard_at_work for his poor experience. His posts, to me, seemed more informative than anything else. If I were in a similar position, and didn't know about the feature at the heart of this discussion, I'd be thrilled at the chance to improve my experience while I waited to upgrade.
Sure, if you see the world through Android-colored glasses, that's how it would look to you.
Richard gave his opinion, he never asked for help. ScrewMaster, upon seeing a member of the flock planning to leave, decided to intervene all on his own. And placed the blame on Richard, not Android.
People have different tastes. You guys really need to learn to accept that. If you were capable of accepting that someone would actually prefer iOS to Android, you might be able to understand that telling people they should just stick with the thing they don't prefer is rather absurd.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you know what the word "sometimes" means?
While he is a troll, having worked in support (at a University in Oregon) with Apple users they do often say the following repeatedly:
"Mac's don't get viruses"
"My Mac is secure"
Both are true. Neither mean (what the OP said), "they are invulnerable to any threats" or "they are impervious to any kind of cyber threat".
>> "Restart" (if necessary)
"If necessary"? way to downplay it. It IS necessary, but not on windows or Linux. Deal with it, they are facts.
Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't (just like sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't on Windows and Linux).
Demonstrating your ignorance of Macs, as usual, I see...
So you do really think that Apple comes up with these great innovations
Um, yes, they actually *do* come up with their ideas.
Which is a rather ironic argument on your part, given that the patent in question is one that HTC bought from Google that they bought from someone else.
which only they could have come up with
No, I don't think they are the only people capable of coming up with their ideas. They are, however, the ones that did come up with them.
and that others are blatantly trying to steal!
In the case of Samsung and Google, absolutely. These two companies are blatant thieves. Samsung copies Apple hardware design so consistently that it would seem they have a whole department solely tasked with doing just that, and Google steals from whoever they need to in order to put out a product, like they did with Sun's Java and Apple's multitouch iOS.
Apple only cares about the sale of the product, not support
Sales of their products are affected by support.
that's why so many of their products fail 2-3 years off shelf life conveniently after warranty.
Then, why do so many *MORE* of their products *NOT* fail 2-3 years after warranty? You imply some sort of "planned failure" to get people to buy new products, but Apple (like most quality brands) take a different tact, and instead come out with new and improved products to entice new sales. And Apple, specifically, is having no problem whatsoever getting people to buy their new products.
That wouldn't happen if they kept failing on people.
And, what does this have to do with the story in question anyway?
Your reply is completely non sequitur. So obviously so that you must know that's the case, so I wonder, why exactly did you make that completely irrelevant reply?
To answer your question, with a more apt example, you patch the browser by clicking "Continue" in the window that comes up on its own (automatically configured to run via a mechanism similar to, but superior to, cron), then click on "Restart" (if necessary).
So, yeah, it's pretty simple. Much simpler than your non-relevant example. However, I'm still not sure what that's got to do with the post you replied to.
Except of course when they don't. When you create a culture of careless idiots by making them think they are invulnerable to any threats this is the only way to handle them.
Care to explain how this is a case of Macs not "just working"? Or how may "careless idiots" were adversely affected by this?
This looks like simple mindless anti-Apple trolling.
If they just came out and said "Yeah we got screwed too" they might have some credibility, but instead they have to act like something like this doesn't actually affect them and quietly sweep the dirt under the rug.
"Got screwed"? How, exactly? This is exactly how the system is supposed to work.
On the other hand of that is the legion of careless users that are made even more careless because they have been given the false belief that they are impervious to any kind of cyber threat. If they just said "Yeah all that 'most secure' stuff we've been telling you is utter nonsense" then they might lose a moron or two to the competition.
So, where are all the infected Macs? And where are all these people who say Macs are "impervious to any kind of cyber threat"? Straw men don't count, I'm talking about actual human beings.
The problem with you anti-Apple trolls is that you rail against an imagined Mac user being screwed over by an imagined Apple, neither of which *actually* exist. Apple isn't evil, Mac users aren't idiots. There are millions of highly intelligent, technologically adept people who use and prefer Macs. What's so difficult to understand about this? Just because a smart person likes a system you don't like, that's not an affront to you. There are smart people who happily use Macs, Windows, Linux...
Why so insecure?
They're probably trying to coax a few details out of you. You can resolve it so easy by just telling us:
And I have, countless times. But while you're probably right that he's trying to coax more details, starting from some invented point of view is not useful. And having to address it over and over again is tiresome.
What are a few examples of the patented features that Apple is claiming they 'own' that you forthrightly would agree they 'own?' Give the folks here an idea what ground you stand on. It doesn't have to be a huge amount of detail. What does Apple have the right to that the other companies are 'stealing?'
I shouldn't have to explain what is readily available online. But if you want an idea, just look at Android and smartphones pre-iPhone and post-iPhone. Look at tablets pre-iPad and post-iPad. Look at touch interaction pre-iOS and post-iOS.
People, like bhagwad, dishonestly misrepresent this as "Apple owns any rectangle with a touch screen" or other bullshit. There is no shortage of ways to design a rectangle with a screen. Most companies seem to have no problem with this except for Samsung.
The last time Apple tried this crap, in the touch-and-feel era when they sued Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard (for their NewWave object-oriented desktop which ran on top of Windows 3) they were ultimately thrown out of court. We're trying to make sure they don't pull that same sort of obstructionist crap again.
Your portrayal of history isn't terribly accurate. Apple's lawsuits weren't entirely dismissed. They did end up learning that copyright didn't apply to look and feel, which is why they are using patents now. The last of their lawsuits against MS were settled in 1997.
As for "this crap", Apple paid for the rights to Xerox's work, and expanded upon it themselves. Macintosh (and Lisa) were completely new ways of interacting with a computer. It's perfectly reasonable to think that Apple should have the rights to the fruits of their labor, and this isn't just "graphics and a pointer and windows", it's specific ways of interacting with these things, just as the Android lawsuits aren't about generalities like so many here seem to think, but about very specific ways of interacting. There are plenty of alternate ways available for Google to come up with.
But they don't. Google is the ultimate technology photocopier. They rarely come up with something new, they just rehash other people's work. Their only real innovation in their consumer products is that they make them free.
On the other hand, they are very innovative in their actual product, which is mining data and serving up ads.
This thread is about Google's lie that they would never use a patent offensively.
Okay. So we have to agree. Google is starting to act as shitty and unethical as Apple and Microsoft customarily do.
We don't agree. I don't think that protecting your property is unethical or shitty. And it's not like this is some new thing on Google's part, it's just a more blatant example that stands out in contrast to their recent public statements
Interesting that you say Apple only POSSIBLY STOLE and yet Google STOLE... has anything gone through courts yet?
Because I haven't seen the Google patents HTC paid for in this discussion.
Are you also concerned about the double standards that Apple is displaying? e.g.:
"We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas." -Steve Jobs
"Good artists copy; great artists steal." -Steve Jobs
-Picasso
Jobs (and Picasso) are using the word "steal" in a different manner here. But they are also honest about their actions.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt but you sure come across like you have an Apple bias.
I do like Apple and their products.
Google is fighting back with patents as they should, I suspect they would prefer they didn't have to so if they now come out and say "we will use our patents to defend our products", would that make you happy?
If they said they would use patents to protect their products *and* they quit trying to play the patent victim card, all hypocrisy would be absolved.
No, I don't believe Google is perfect and I do not believe they are still living up to "do no evil".
The first part is a straw man. No one is claiming Google or Apple are perfect. The second part is all but meaningless. "Evil" is a silly term to use, and not the basis for a reasonable general discussion about tech companies.
To quote you: You work within the system you have, not the system you wish you had.
That is precisely what Google is now doing.
And I have absolutely no problem with Google doing that. I just wish they would be honest about it.
Cathedral vs. Bazaar. Some of us may remember the gcc/egcs split or the emacs/xemacs saga, where FSF packages were developed in secrecy until they were released (sound like Android?).
No, because Android source isn't released even after the product ships. That's the whole premise of this thread.
Calling these patent infringements on either side "stealing" is flat out silly.
It's well-established that one can "steal" and idea.
Though if you want to call it that, then apple stole from google and HTC
Quite possibly.
apple started shooting first then google gave HTC a gun to start firing back
Only after Google stole from them. But that's not even what this thread is about. This thread is about Google's lie that they would never use a patent offensively. I'm really not bothered that Google is protecting their property. In fact, it's exactly the sort of thing they *should* do.
But I do care that they play a double-standard here and blatantly lie about it.
Right now in the mobile phone industry, EVERY possible conceivable invention, and several inconceivable ones are covered by multiple patents owned by multiple different companies. The only way to defend in the industry is to respond back, oh I'm infringing on 4 of your patents, oh yeah well your infringing on 4 of mine also, we both break even with just a few billion down the drain in lawyer fees, any company must either do that, or just say oh my bad I'll stop selling phones. Just flat out dropping out isn't an option, they are in it way to deep, so all that can be done is to assist the companies making their phones by preventing them from getting steamrolled.
Except that's exactly *NOT* what's going on here.
Wait a minute - you actually believe that Apple comes up with these great new designs and ideas and these evil other guys are blatantly "stealing" those wondrous innovations that no one except Apple could possibly come up with? Like the square design for a tablet?
Please tell me that's not what you believe.
It's not what I believe.
Why do you guys insist on making shit like this up?
Except that's not what's happening. Apple invented iOS and the iPhone and iPad. They feel that Android in general has copied parts of it that they own. How are they the "bad guy" for protecting what they own?
They aren't "tying up" the competition. They are telling the competition to come up with their *own* products.
Your presumption that Apple's case will win, whereas HTC/Google's case must lose, shows that you assume Apple is always right.
Where did I claim either outcome?
How do you know HTC/Google's case has no merit instead?
Where did I say anything like this whatsoever?
If I am allowed to use the word 'steal' here like the legion of Apple fanboys emulating the RIAA...
It's the vernacular.
Maybe Apple actually STOLE from those new Google patents instead?
Maybe they did.
No one is claiming the rights to anyone else's code. Where do you guys come up with this shit?
Are you _really_ suggesting apple should have the right to all things touch screen and square with rounded edges?
No, and no one else is suggesting this either.
Nothing you ever come up with is completely original. It all builds from your prior experience with other things. This is how people learn and progress.
Irrelevant.
So you think apple and windows shouldn't have ever existed too? because xerox should have patented their display system and kept it locked down to extremely expensive business systems for 20 years?
Where do you get these straw men?
People don't like your idea because it stifles progress by decades.
First off, it's not my idea. Second, *people* like patents. It's only a bunch of whiny little bitches on nerd forums that dislike them.
That would be reasonable in a sane patent system.
You work within the system you have, not the system you wish you had.
To make the obligatory car analogy, you and I both have dirty cars but own buckets, rags, water and soap. Both of us realize putting water and soap in the bucket, then using a rag to wash the car would get the car clean. You think of it a little bit before I do, or perhaps run off to the patent office first, and I now can't wash my car for the next 17 years, or have to pay you every time I do.
Yes, and that's exactly how it's supposed to work, assuming no prior art.
Why do nerds seem to think that patents are only supposed to cover things that no one else could possibly think of?
People would get much less bent out of shape if patent quality wasn't such absolute crap and getting crap patents overturned wasn't expensive.
*People* aren't getting bent out of shape. Nerds (a subset of "people" in general) are, and really just a subset of those.
Where did I say Apple is always right? All I ever say around here is that Apple isn't always *wrong*, which is what you jackasses here seem to think.
I assume you are one of those apple consumers that has the religious parts of their brain activated when thinking about Apple.
And I'll assume you're a troll for using such an absurd argument.
Google is not trying to destroy apple, just trying to stop them destroying the smart phone/tablet market...which is their aim.
Um, no. Apple is just telling Android handset makers to come up with their own stuff. Google, on the other hand, is trying very hard to legitimize their 'theft'.
So in other words if you try to break my arm I am damned well going to break yours first if I can, or at least subdue you!!
No one is saying Google doesn't have the right to "fight back". That's not the issue. The issue is that they are doing exactly what they said they never would do (and that so many Slashdotters like to reference in an attempt to make Google seem like saints).
Except one party provoked the shooting (stole another's property), all the while saying they abhor guns and would never use them.
And now they're using them.
On the topic of things like keychain syncing going away, I suspect that the equivalent functionality isn't going away, but that the specific MobileMe keychain syncing is going away, and that Lion (and maybe even iOS) will use iCloud instead.
Right, because telling people the problems about the technology and saying that people shouldn't buy it based on these problems is bad? Last I checked, that was called an opinion.
Except that's not what the OP was doing. He was trying to act like his opinion was relevant to everyone.
"Even for people who don't care about the source, shoving games into a SaaS model is simply screwing consumers."
In typical nerd fashion, he wasn't content to give his own opinion, but he has to somehow make it out to be the opinion that *everyone* should have.
By that right then shouldn't Palm being suing Apple's ass? After all we are talking about a rounded square with cute little icons, that pretty much describes every Palm Pilot I have ever held in my hand.
Are you saying an iPad looks just like Palm? Because both look quite different.
But this is pretty much the problem with the whole patents and copyrights mess. they allow shit that is so damned vague you might as well patent 'A thing about some stuff' because frankly there ain't no way in hell anyone is gonna mistake a Galaxy for an iShiny.
The Galaxy Tab and some of the Galaxy phones look almost *exactly* like an iPad and iPhone.
No this is just more proof that Apple without Jobs sucks ass.
I didn't realize these lawsuits just came out over the past week or so! I was under the impression that they were launched while Jobs was the CEO...
No I have a feeling we are gonna see more of this shit as the company slowly slides downhill without the man behind the big desk.
Yeah, right, because Apple is doing so poorly. What planet do you live on?
Just like the last time it'll coast for a couple of years with what they have in the pipe but the dumb moves and bad plays that hurt their rep are already showing up.
Wait, are they declining or coasting?
But this is all nonsense, of course. It's not like you've been praising Apple and Jobs all this time, and only now see some sort of "decline". You've been making these sort of claims for at least over a year now, and this is just the latest excuse to fit your preconceived notions.
How many times do you have to be wrong before you get a clue that some of your fundamental assumptions are flawed? Apple is flying high, and quarter after quarter they go higher and higher. Yet, for some people, somehow it's always *this current* quarter is the apex of their growth. And they're always wrong. You'd think eventually guys like you would get a clue and maybe actually wait for *ACTUAL* signs of decline before running at the mouth like a raving lunatic.
Here's a clue for you: there's *ALWAYS* going to be something you can point at to say "look here, this can be a cause or sign of Apple's decline". Always. So if you run around looking for reasons to proclaim Apple's impending doom, you'll find it. But that doesn't mean that they actually *are* in decline. Didn't you ever hear the story of Chicken Little?
Call me crazy, but that seems to me like he's placing the blame squarely on Android there.
Ok, you're crazy.
He wasn't blaming Android, he was blaming Richard for using a stock Android setup. You're being incredibly dishonest to pretend like ScrewMaster was blaming Android, especially when he said, "I was telling him that he could, with very little effort, make it closer to what he would like, to make it better suit his own preferences. Android allows you to do that, Apple does not."
In other words, Richard just needs to put in a little more effort, and Android allows that while Apple, somehow, does not, which is strange given that Richard seems to prefer iOS, so it's hard to see how Android could allow him to make the phone closer to iOS, but Apple cannot.
It's a classic case of cognitive dissonance. Mistaking one's own opinions for universal truth, then applying reason incorrectly as a result.
Still, I don't see how ScrewMaster was placing any blame on Richard_at_work for his poor experience. His posts, to me, seemed more informative than anything else. If I were in a similar position, and didn't know about the feature at the heart of this discussion, I'd be thrilled at the chance to improve my experience while I waited to upgrade.
Sure, if you see the world through Android-colored glasses, that's how it would look to you.
Richard gave his opinion, he never asked for help. ScrewMaster, upon seeing a member of the flock planning to leave, decided to intervene all on his own. And placed the blame on Richard, not Android.
People have different tastes. You guys really need to learn to accept that. If you were capable of accepting that someone would actually prefer iOS to Android, you might be able to understand that telling people they should just stick with the thing they don't prefer is rather absurd.