Screen area was in short supply on the 1980’s machines used with Smalltalk-80. To preserve it, scroll bars were not shown all the time, but only when a scrollable view had the focus.
"In some portable devices, scroll bars are used to indicate the position in the document or list of the displayed portion. But scroll bars are fixed user interface features that take up valuable display screen area on an already small display screen."
It's a scrollbar that disappears when you aren't using it. They're just trying to divorce it from the usual scrollbar to make it seem more novel.
The fact that so many people complained about how different it was from the scrollbar they used to know proves it is novel.
This discussion is full of "prior art" that appeared long after Apple filed for the original patent. Apple just has to scan these posts and has a nice list of people to sue. Thanks guys.
This word, it doesn't mean what you think it means.
Patent was filed in 2012, Android browser - for example - had scrollbars like these since 2.x.
Way to prove you can't read patents. "This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/969,819, filed Jan. 4, 2008 now U.S. Pat. No. 8,130,205"
Tell them you can't read patents - and this needs to stop!
No, really,this patent is merely about the new "you only see them when they move" scrollbars of the iPhone (and OS X Lion). Not about "displaying lists on touch screens".
No, this discussion is about multitasking, with torrents as a specific example. There are many others, but apparently (judging by the fact that yours is a third reply trying to derail the discussion in exact same way), users of Apple devices just can't comprehend what multitasking is.
Maybe it is because you tried to detract from the fact that the iPhone can multitask by bringing up torrents? Nah, that can't be it.
First of all: any such expenditure is at least as much about PR as it is about actually saving a life. Not to mention making the mission more certain to succeed.
What what really gets to me is the math he uses. Maybe it makes more sense in the article he wrote for Reason, but where did he even take those numbers from? His formula seems to be obvious: (give up four billion dollars) / (a one in seven chance of killing an astronaut) = (astronaut’s life is worth twenty-eight billion dollars)
That seems to be based on some cost risk management accounting formula - but does it make sense to look at it that way? Does it even make sense to consider the probabilities in the calculation? Wouldn't it make more sense to say (one astronaut’s life is worth) = (total money spend to keep astronauts alive) / (sum of astronauts send into space). Because that is what it's actually worth to NASA to get one astronaut send up back down again alive (and healthy). In his example $4B.
So you want to play the dating game? If you had even read the first paragraph of TFA, you could have learned that the letters were send when the injunction was still in full force. And even ignoring that: the injunction still does exist, it's just stayed.
"Oh, you mean the antenna that in actual, practical use is functionally no worse than"
if that was true, SJ wouldn't have told people to use the other hand,
They have one for $19 for iPhone 4; again, replacement service is extra.
How can you even begin to compare that with $10 for a replacement Galaxy S3 battery which you can easily replace yourself? The battery is half the price and fitting is free, so in total at least 4x cheaper.
Nice work, selecting that one specific battery to make your point. If you browse Amazon you will find that most genuine batteries are well under the $100 mark, with perfectly good third party ones coming in around $20.
Plus tax and shipping, for batteries with far lower capacity and of course zero work done by the seller.
"And we’ve removed plastics wherever possible, in favor of materials that are more highly recyclable, more durable, more efficient and longer lasting. "
In what universe is two hundred dollars to replace a battery not exhorbitant?
In a universe where Dell asks $145 ( + tax & shipping) for a battery with less capacity and that is thicker than a RMBP. And that's nothing when you look at their $75 for a 15 Wh battery.
"...all qualifying products." I didn't hear that future products (like additional retina screen lap tops) will be EPEAT.
http://www.epeat.net/: I am very happy to announce that all of Apple’s previously registered products, and a number of new products, are back on the EPEAT registry.
So unless you want to nitpick and claim that you actually meant "future" products aren't on the list yet - well then DUH!
Slashdot Mirror
But scroll bars are fixed user interface features that take up valuable display screen area on an already small display screen.
This is not correct.
Some of the earliest GUI scrollbars, on smalltalk systems, popped up only when used, in order to conserve screen real-estate.
http://basalgangster.macgui.com/RetroMacComputing/The_Long_View/Entries/2011/7/30_Scroll_Bar.html
Screen area was in short supply on the 1980’s machines used with Smalltalk-80. To preserve it, scroll bars were not shown all the time, but only when a scrollable view had the focus.
Not the same.
"In some portable devices, scroll bars are used to indicate the position in the document or list of the displayed portion. But scroll bars are fixed user interface features that take up valuable display screen area on an already small display screen."
It's a scrollbar that disappears when you aren't using it. They're just trying to divorce it from the usual scrollbar to make it seem more novel.
The fact that so many people complained about how different it was from the scrollbar they used to know proves it is novel.
This discussion is full of "prior art" that appeared long after Apple filed for the original patent. Apple just has to scan these posts and has a nice list of people to sue. Thanks guys.
> new
This word, it doesn't mean what you think it means.
Patent was filed in 2012, Android browser - for example - had scrollbars like these since 2.x.
Way to prove you can't read patents. "This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/969,819, filed Jan. 4, 2008 now U.S. Pat. No. 8,130,205"
No, really,this patent is merely about the new "you only see them when they move" scrollbars of the iPhone (and OS X Lion). Not about "displaying lists on touch screens".
No, this discussion is about multitasking, with torrents as a specific example. There are many others, but apparently (judging by the fact that yours is a third reply trying to derail the discussion in exact same way), users of Apple devices just can't comprehend what multitasking is.
Maybe it is because you tried to detract from the fact that the iPhone can multitask by bringing up torrents? Nah, that can't be it.
Thanks slashdot for this breaking story about a new BETA release of iOS.
Following a breaking story about a new BETA of the Linux kernel. Well, minus Linus complaining it's too big.
Jelly Bean is already available on multiple devices including Samsung models.
There, go ahead and try to spin that as a negative.
Yeah, you have to buy a new phone to get jelly bean, that's why you complain about an upgrade to iOS.
So this discussion is actually about pirating movies, not about multitasking.
AmerCIA.
"We're keeping an eye on you, buddy."
Nice try, but it was the "artist" that was spying on people.
Would you do it if there was a 100% chance of the vessel rupturing a few minutes after takeoff? Probably not, that would be suicide without any gains.
Vladimir Komarov did. http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2011/05/02/134597833/cosmonaut-crashed-into-earth-crying-in-rage
Only that he didn't die a few minutes after takeoff, but more than a day after.
What what really gets to me is the math he uses. Maybe it makes more sense in the article he wrote for Reason, but where did he even take those numbers from? His formula seems to be obvious:
(give up four billion dollars) / (a one in seven chance of killing an astronaut) = (astronaut’s life is worth twenty-eight billion dollars)
That seems to be based on some cost risk management accounting formula - but does it make sense to look at it that way? Does it even make sense to consider the probabilities in the calculation? Wouldn't it make more sense to say (one astronaut’s life is worth) = (total money spend to keep astronauts alive) / (sum of astronauts send into space). Because that is what it's actually worth to NASA to get one astronaut send up back down again alive (and healthy). In his example $4B.
b) the ban wasn't lifted, just temporarily removed until further legal wranglings. http://www.androidauthority.com/galaxy-nexus-ban-temporary-lifted-100109/ [androidauthority.com]
temporarily removed = temporarily lifted = lifted(if stated after the starting point of the period in which it was temporarily lifted)
Death penalty temporarily put on hold = found innocent of murder.
Samsung's lawyers are warmed up- and when the first shipment of iPhone5s reaches customs they will pounce.
Because Apple copied the design they copied from Apple?
Except there is no injunction against the Nexus, just the Tab 10.1
Except there was http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/06/30/028234/sale-of-galaxy-nexus-banned-in-the-us.
Keyword: was. Your slashdot article is dated June 30. This engadget article is dated July 6. So, as GP said, there is no ban on the Nexus.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/06/samsung-gets-temporary-stay-on-galaxy-nexus-ban/
So you want to play the dating game? If you had even read the first paragraph of TFA, you could have learned that the letters were send when the injunction was still in full force. And even ignoring that: the injunction still does exist, it's just stayed.
"Oh, you mean the antenna that in actual, practical use is functionally no worse than" if that was true, SJ wouldn't have told people to use the other hand,
Errm, no, he didn't.
That misquote aside: every phone maker does the same: http://dontholditwrong.tumblr.com/
No it was not stolen.
Then why was the "finder" found guilty of misdemeanor theft?
They have one for $19 for iPhone 4; again, replacement service is extra.
How can you even begin to compare that with $10 for a replacement Galaxy S3 battery which you can easily replace yourself? The battery is half the price and fitting is free, so in total at least 4x cheaper.
http://www.thenewstribe.com/2012/07/11/problems-emerge-in-samsung-galaxy-s3/#.UAGLLh0fyto - depends on how often you have to replace them. And that's not going into the cost of replacing the covers http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/363002/20120714/samsung-galaxys3-marble-white-pebbleblue-battery-cover.htm.
Nice work, selecting that one specific battery to make your point. If you browse Amazon you will find that most genuine batteries are well under the $100 mark, with perfectly good third party ones coming in around $20.
Plus tax and shipping, for batteries with far lower capacity and of course zero work done by the seller.
"And we’ve removed plastics wherever possible, in favor of materials that are more highly recyclable, more durable, more efficient and longer lasting. "
Longer lasting materials? Too bad that doesn't include OSX...
IOW the old OS X will last even longer - I thought you were trying to disprove them?
Sadly, the most prolific example was recently removed from their site.
So let's add "too dumb to use www.archive.org" to the list.
In what universe is two hundred dollars to replace a battery not exhorbitant?
In a universe where Dell asks $145 ( + tax & shipping) for a battery with less capacity and that is thicker than a RMBP. And that's nothing when you look at their $75 for a 15 Wh battery.
Source:"all of Apple’s Mac line had top EPEAT ratings, with the exception of the company’s new MacBook Pro with Retina Display."
Had is the word you should have emphasized. http://ww2.epeat.net/ProductDisplay.aspx?return=pm&action=view&search=true&productid=8661&ProductType=3&epeatcountryid=1 Apple 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display (MC975), Gold Rating, 21 Points (same as all other Mac notebooks).
3. Use this chance to tell reporters that your products are more environmentally friendly than the competition
How do you spin away the fact that the iPhone and maxiPad batteries remain as glued in as ever?
Who cares? Even the EPEAT doesn't.
"...all qualifying products." I didn't hear that future products (like additional retina screen lap tops) will be EPEAT.
http://www.epeat.net/: I am very happy to announce that all of Apple’s previously registered products, and a number of new products, are back on the EPEAT registry.
So unless you want to nitpick and claim that you actually meant "future" products aren't on the list yet - well then DUH!