For a conclusion like this, I don't need to provide supporting statements to someone who knows how the system is supposed to work. Sufficient to say that Anti trust systems are designed to prohibit artificial barriers to entry. Also, that I write software and there are indeed no barriers to entry - or should not be if the system works correctly.
There's a right to not have artificial barriers to entry. Creating software for example isn't a "natural monopoly" like railroads or electricity generation. Patents are a form of imposed barriers to entry that shouldn't be there in the first place.
It's important to remember that it still might infringe on some Apple patent or the other. It's a sad sign of how broken the system is when you try and design a product to specifically avoid all patents but still can't be sure that it succeeds. If Samsung/Google with all their resources can't be sure that it avoids hundreds of thousands of "patents," how is a smaller company without all the resources supposed to do the same?
Bullshit. I LOVE the tabs over the location bar. I think only those who really care complain. The rest of us don't raise our voice because we're happy with the way it is.
So says the person with no logical reason to explain why the Kindle doesn't violate Apple's design patents. Hiding your own lack of rationality behind convenient declarations isn't very mature.
Sure it does. Apple has just chosen not so sue them cause they don't pose a threat. You really think the Kindle doesn't violate Apple's "design" patent?
Let's see. I has to be rectangular. The exact dimensions aren't the same as the iPad. It has to have rounded corners because otherwise they're uncomfortable....And making the sides flush with the screen is an improvement. You're saying that Apple has the right to claim that no one else can do that?
Once you start making tablets which have a touchscreen instead of a stylus based system, they all have to look the same. No other design is possible. Apple made the first touchscreen tablet. That doesn't mean they get to be the only ones to do it.
As a person who doesn't care about cars, I have no clue what you're talking about. Now a car is about 20 times bigger than an iPad (perhaps more.) So can you tell the difference between your two cars at 10*20 = 200 feet?
Two rectangular slabs are supposed to be perfectly distinguishable at 10 feet? Perhaps Apple wants Samsung to make round tablets. How bout trapezoidal? I'm sure that's not patented...
They did everything a "modern" smartphone does. I look for functionality when deciding whether or not something sucks. AND I could install whatever I wanted on them by downloading the file from a website. It was just like a computer in mini. So no - they didn't suck.
They didn't suck. People just didn't really know about them. I know because I've been using smartphones since 2004 starting with the Tungsten from Palm. Often it requires great marketing to get people to really adopt something.
I'm afraid you misunderstand. Apple is stealing Samsung technology. I suppose you want real INNOVATORS like Samsung to just let thieves like Apple take their IP and blatantly use it in their own products. Don't you know, patents are supposed protect innovators!
(Tired after hearing that Android "stole" from Apple ad nauseum)
So you do really think that Apple comes up with these great innovations which only they could have come up with and that others are blatantly trying to steal!
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?
As Kelvin once said, you haven't really understood anything till you can put numbers on it. Intuitively we understand that a baseball with follow a parabolic path when it's moving in a gravitational field. But unless you can calculate the speed, the angle and the other vairables, the understanding is imperfect.
Slashdot Mirror
For a conclusion like this, I don't need to provide supporting statements to someone who knows how the system is supposed to work. Sufficient to say that Anti trust systems are designed to prohibit artificial barriers to entry. Also, that I write software and there are indeed no barriers to entry - or should not be if the system works correctly.
There's a right to not have artificial barriers to entry. Creating software for example isn't a "natural monopoly" like railroads or electricity generation. Patents are a form of imposed barriers to entry that shouldn't be there in the first place.
It's important to remember that it still might infringe on some Apple patent or the other. It's a sad sign of how broken the system is when you try and design a product to specifically avoid all patents but still can't be sure that it succeeds. If Samsung/Google with all their resources can't be sure that it avoids hundreds of thousands of "patents," how is a smaller company without all the resources supposed to do the same?
Bullshit. I LOVE the tabs over the location bar. I think only those who really care complain. The rest of us don't raise our voice because we're happy with the way it is.
To not be "evil" 100%, what do you suggest Google should do?
Wow - that is remarkably...I don't know what!
So says the person with no logical reason to explain why the Kindle doesn't violate Apple's design patents. Hiding your own lack of rationality behind convenient declarations isn't very mature.
Sure it does. Apple has just chosen not so sue them cause they don't pose a threat. You really think the Kindle doesn't violate Apple's "design" patent?
Let's see. I has to be rectangular. The exact dimensions aren't the same as the iPad. It has to have rounded corners because otherwise they're uncomfortable....And making the sides flush with the screen is an improvement. You're saying that Apple has the right to claim that no one else can do that?
No one ever claimed that PCs had to be beige from a functional perspective. What are you smoking?
Good point.
Once you start making tablets which have a touchscreen instead of a stylus based system, they all have to look the same. No other design is possible. Apple made the first touchscreen tablet. That doesn't mean they get to be the only ones to do it.
As a person who doesn't care about cars, I have no clue what you're talking about. Now a car is about 20 times bigger than an iPad (perhaps more.) So can you tell the difference between your two cars at 10*20 = 200 feet?
Two rectangular slabs are supposed to be perfectly distinguishable at 10 feet? Perhaps Apple wants Samsung to make round tablets. How bout trapezoidal? I'm sure that's not patented...
They did everything a "modern" smartphone does. I look for functionality when deciding whether or not something sucks. AND I could install whatever I wanted on them by downloading the file from a website. It was just like a computer in mini. So no - they didn't suck.
They didn't suck. People just didn't really know about them. I know because I've been using smartphones since 2004 starting with the Tungsten from Palm. Often it requires great marketing to get people to really adopt something.
But how does this work out There must be thousands of movies. Each one paying 30 mill means dozens of billions of dollars!
I'm afraid you misunderstand. Apple is stealing Samsung technology. I suppose you want real INNOVATORS like Samsung to just let thieves like Apple take their IP and blatantly use it in their own products. Don't you know, patents are supposed protect innovators!
(Tired after hearing that Android "stole" from Apple ad nauseum)
So you do really think that Apple comes up with these great innovations which only they could have come up with and that others are blatantly trying to steal!
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.
Poor, poor Apple :(
(sob!)
How convenient. Trading your rights for freedom. Textbook case of compromise.
As Kelvin once said, you haven't really understood anything till you can put numbers on it. Intuitively we understand that a baseball with follow a parabolic path when it's moving in a gravitational field. But unless you can calculate the speed, the angle and the other vairables, the understanding is imperfect.
So then they should also be selling billboard space?
Google is not an IT company
This is the funniest comment I've read today :D