Not when the perps wipe the device. Once that happens the ONLY people who can do jack shit are at Apple, using the serial number and seeing when that device connects to their servers.
So good thing the criminal didn't wipe the device in this case then. Well, not for your paranoid ramblings of course.
So why didn't Samsung's lawyers present them instead of Fidler's? It seems they know more about design patents than you do (big surprise). Too bad the PHB that decided to copy Apple didn't listen.
Did that happen in 1994 when Fidler's demo was shown to people? Of course not. It wasn't a real product. It was stardust and dreams.
This matters not for the purposes of establishing prior art / originality, though. You don't get to claim "well, I started selling it first" and ignore the works that preceded you on those grounds.
Yeah, what matters is that Fidler's mock-up misses many characteristics from Apple's design patent. Too bad for Samsung really.
Apple sued Microsoft in the mid-80s for making an OS too similar to their own (which led MS plus other makers like Atari and Commodore to deliberately change their OSes appearance).
No. Apple sued Microsoft for developing an operating system based on information they received under NDA. Microsoft did, in fact, stab Apple in the back on that occasion. The only reason Apple lost is because the key innovation wasn't theirs to begin with (i.e. - taken from Xerox).
Wrong. They lost because the judge decided the license to uses the copied elements in their programs for the Mac wasn't strict enough, and thus also gave them the right to use them in their own GUI. It had nothing to do with Xerox.
Contrast the story above with Apple's treatment of Pystar and see whether things have changed or not.
Shachar
Hilarious that you defend a "company" that had to violate the GPL to violate Apple's license.
We are blessed that back in the 1970's, 1980's and in early 1990's there were many inventors decided to share their incredible inventions with the world, and they also decided against patenting their inventions
The only reason Fidler didn't patent his "invention" is because he had nothing to patent. And his only claim to fame is that one of his mock-ups had rounded corners just like the iPad, but non of the other design elements from Apple's design patents. But the crown of his hubris is claiming alan Kay stole his idea for the tablet from this mock-up.
Okay, it seems it's time for an analogy: see the problem cited with Sandboxing here as the equivalent of Read permissions for a file on Unix systems. You can give a program read-access to a file (via its dedicated User). If you don't give your movie player read access to all the files your movie consists of, it can't play it (or show its subtitles). If you give it full read access to the directory containing your movies, it can play them all. Get it now?
All I'm asking is to let go of the notion that a movie is a file especially when you made it so that it isn't. The sad thing is that many geeks have completely lost their ability for such obvious abstraction.
You don't want to embedded all possible sub-title languages into the a movie file and make it unnecessary big. Separate sub-title files make it easier to add new language.
Then only embed the ones you want. Problem solved. Better yet, don't embed any. Even better: don't pirate movies.
Also, as people are discussing above, the OS file dialog is basically asking user to give permission to access a file, so I don't think a custom UI for access files will work.
Wow, you FSFs really have a ghard time letting go of your fetish. I didn't say that movie players should let you select files to play, it should let you select movies to play. And it could do that if you as a user didn't gave it just access to single files, but to your bloody movie directory.
That way Sandboxing works flawlessly for both the user and the programmer - if only they could let go of their File System Fetish.
the real problem is that the user feels the need to have a movie split over several files
The user is likely downloading the movie which is split over several files, and doesn't know how to join them. You are blaming the victim.
If anything, I'm blaming The Pirate (TM). But oddly enough, your little theory isn't mentioned by anyone but you.
Not that it would matter because my solution would also solve your pirating problem.
IOW, the problem are the File System Fetishists.
Filesystems work. Otherwise we wouldn't have them. We'd just have object stores.
So you are a pirate and a File System Fetishist. Listen: play with files all you want if it makes you happy, but don't complain when others make computers easier to use by treating movies as movies and not a bunch of files that should be kept segregated.
No the real problem is that the user feels the need to have a movie split over several files instead of having the movie in a container. And then doesn't want to give access to all those files by either clicking all those files or (heaven forbid) the containing directory in the Open file selector.
Or that the developer is afraid to give a decent interface where the user can select which of the available files can be played apart from the Open file dialogue.
This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox).
If the file opens in MplayerX, at some time the file type would have to be associated with it. Then all accompanying files should have also been associated with MplayerX. And that would probably have been something a simple Automator script from the developer could have done.
Okay, you win. Now three things. No, wait: show me first that you can actually control the playback of media with a bog-standard keyboard as was claimed, because just typing wasn't what was claimed.
And *dont* say "plastic". There are nore kinds of plastic than there are world religions, and every bit as diverse in their properties. That was covered in the "wall of words" you just handwaved.
You are now being a troll.
Did I get that right: When Apple uses Aluminium casing the curvature of the corners is design, when Samsung uses plastic, the almost exact same curvature becomes a necessity? And I'm the troll?
Apple's dock connector supports some signals that aren't directly available on USB (like video out and audio in/out)
Other manufacturers can get a micro-USB port to also double as a HDMI output.
By raping the standard USB port into doing something not USB-standard. And that's better because? Ohh, because there's about a dozen peripherals that support this.
Speaking for myself, I've never wanted to carry around anything but the device itself. Being able to have a cheap, almost disposable, charger at work that works with all my devices is the way to go.
Easy solution: get a Micro-USB dock-connector and glue it in. Now your iPhone has the same standard connector all other phones have.
So let me get this straight? Apple in 2001 used FireWire not USB for the iPod. But for their connector they used 30 pins. Most of the pins were unused but there were left open for future use (like switching from FireWire to USB).
Actually the first two generations of iPod only had a Firewire port (and headphone jack). From the third generation on that was replaced by the Dock connector which could be connected to both Firewire and USB cables. But even then you couldn't charge over USB, because it didn't supply enough power yet.
MHL is USB data and an HDMI-compliant *DIGITAL* audio/video stream over a 5-pin connector.
No it isn't. It's something non-USB using USB ports. USB.org has no info on MHL. Only Samsung can do USB data at the same time as MHL - and they use a non-standard connector.
For a simple charge-and-sync application, USB is fine, but there are no standard formats that include that PLUS video, audio, serial, etc.
For video & audio, there is MHL. Most high-end Android phones these days seem to support it via their micro-USB slot.
Mobile High-Definition Link (MHL) is a proposed industry standard
There have been 2 connectors used on phones so far:
5-pin MHL-USB Connector - description translates to not-USB over a USB cable, disabling any USB functionality
11-pin MHL-USB Connector - proprietary Samsung connector, using MHL and USB at the same time - but not using an actual USB connector on the phone.
And there's almost a dozen peripherals supporting this.
Slashdot Mirror
Not when the perps wipe the device. Once that happens the ONLY people who can do jack shit are at Apple, using the serial number and seeing when that device connects to their servers.
So good thing the criminal didn't wipe the device in this case then. Well, not for your paranoid ramblings of course.
Nothing to see here. Just another Apple "somebody style our prototype" marketing campaign.
Prototype? You think that in the house of a guy who has been dead for a year there was a prototype?
Not sure why, but I've always felt that way. Maybe it has to do with when I was 5 and my father was killed by a clown.
Is that you, Bruce?
How is that any different than Apple in this case (except that Apple did patent where nothing was to patent)?
The difference is mostly that you are wrong.
No, but many devices before the iPad did.
So why didn't Samsung's lawyers present them instead of Fidler's? It seems they know more about design patents than you do (big surprise). Too bad the PHB that decided to copy Apple didn't listen.
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/06-1562.pdf - read it before you make any more claims about "prior art". EGYPTIAN GODDESS, INC., vs. SWISA, INC. is the precedent case for prior art for design patents.
Did that happen in 1994 when Fidler's demo was shown to people? Of course not. It wasn't a real product. It was stardust and dreams.
This matters not for the purposes of establishing prior art / originality, though. You don't get to claim "well, I started selling it first" and ignore the works that preceded you on those grounds.
Yeah, what matters is that Fidler's mock-up misses many characteristics from Apple's design patent. Too bad for Samsung really.
Apple sued Microsoft in the mid-80s for making an OS too similar to their own (which led MS plus other makers like Atari and Commodore to deliberately change their OSes appearance).
No. Apple sued Microsoft for developing an operating system based on information they received under NDA. Microsoft did, in fact, stab Apple in the back on that occasion. The only reason Apple lost is because the key innovation wasn't theirs to begin with (i.e. - taken from Xerox).
Wrong. They lost because the judge decided the license to uses the copied elements in their programs for the Mac wasn't strict enough, and thus also gave them the right to use them in their own GUI. It had nothing to do with Xerox.
Contrast the story above with Apple's treatment of Pystar and see whether things have changed or not.
Shachar
Hilarious that you defend a "company" that had to violate the GPL to violate Apple's license.
We are blessed that back in the 1970's, 1980's and in early 1990's there were many inventors decided to share their incredible inventions with the world, and they also decided against patenting their inventions
The only reason Fidler didn't patent his "invention" is because he had nothing to patent. And his only claim to fame is that one of his mock-ups had rounded corners just like the iPad, but non of the other design elements from Apple's design patents. But the crown of his hubris is claiming alan Kay stole his idea for the tablet from this mock-up.
And even the second time around, Fidler's tablet still hasn't got the flush surface of the iPad (and Samsung's Tabs).
All I'm asking is to let go of the notion that a movie is a file especially when you made it so that it isn't. The sad thing is that many geeks have completely lost their ability for such obvious abstraction.
You don't want to embedded all possible sub-title languages into the a movie file and make it unnecessary big. Separate sub-title files make it easier to add new language.
Then only embed the ones you want. Problem solved. Better yet, don't embed any. Even better: don't pirate movies.
Also, as people are discussing above, the OS file dialog is basically asking user to give permission to access a file, so I don't think a custom UI for access files will work.
Wow, you FSFs really have a ghard time letting go of your fetish. I didn't say that movie players should let you select files to play, it should let you select movies to play. And it could do that if you as a user didn't gave it just access to single files, but to your bloody movie directory.
That way Sandboxing works flawlessly for both the user and the programmer - if only they could let go of their File System Fetish.
the real problem is that the user feels the need to have a movie split over several files
The user is likely downloading the movie which is split over several files, and doesn't know how to join them. You are blaming the victim.
If anything, I'm blaming The Pirate (TM). But oddly enough, your little theory isn't mentioned by anyone but you.
Not that it would matter because my solution would also solve your pirating problem.
IOW, the problem are the File System Fetishists.
Filesystems work. Otherwise we wouldn't have them. We'd just have object stores.
So you are a pirate and a File System Fetishist. Listen: play with files all you want if it makes you happy, but don't complain when others make computers easier to use by treating movies as movies and not a bunch of files that should be kept segregated.
That's the problem.
No the real problem is that the user feels the need to have a movie split over several files instead of having the movie in a container. And then doesn't want to give access to all those files by either clicking all those files or (heaven forbid) the containing directory in the Open file selector.
Or that the developer is afraid to give a decent interface where the user can select which of the available files can be played apart from the Open file dialogue.
IOW, the problem are the File System Fetishists.
This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox).
If the file opens in MplayerX, at some time the file type would have to be associated with it. Then all accompanying files should have also been associated with MplayerX. And that would probably have been something a simple Automator script from the developer could have done.
Okay, you win. Now three things. No, wait: show me first that you can actually control the playback of media with a bog-standard keyboard as was claimed, because just typing wasn't what was claimed.
Failure to read what was written; likewise.
What *MATERIAL* is the casing made from?
And *dont* say "plastic". There are nore kinds of plastic than there are world religions, and every bit as diverse in their properties. That was covered in the "wall of words" you just handwaved.
You are now being a troll.
Did I get that right: When Apple uses Aluminium casing the curvature of the corners is design, when Samsung uses plastic, the almost exact same curvature becomes a necessity? And I'm the troll?
Samsung, for example.
That's funny, because they don't use the standard Micro-USB port for this, at least on newer machines like the SIII.
Apple's dock connector supports some signals that aren't directly available on USB (like video out and audio in/out)
Other manufacturers can get a micro-USB port to also double as a HDMI output.
By raping the standard USB port into doing something not USB-standard. And that's better because? Ohh, because there's about a dozen peripherals that support this.
30 Pin Dock Connector to Micro USB Adapter for The New iPad iPhone 4S iPod Touch - White Quantity Range Unit Price 1 -- 3 $ 1.12
Sorry, I am bellow your price. You win.
Speaking for myself, I've never wanted to carry around anything but the device itself. Being able to have a cheap, almost disposable, charger at work that works with all my devices is the way to go.
Easy solution: get a Micro-USB dock-connector and glue it in. Now your iPhone has the same standard connector all other phones have.
Yes they really do.
So let me get this straight? Apple in 2001 used FireWire not USB for the iPod. But for their connector they used 30 pins. Most of the pins were unused but there were left open for future use (like switching from FireWire to USB).
Actually the first two generations of iPod only had a Firewire port (and headphone jack). From the third generation on that was replaced by the Dock connector which could be connected to both Firewire and USB cables. But even then you couldn't charge over USB, because it didn't supply enough power yet.
MHL is USB data and an HDMI-compliant *DIGITAL* audio/video stream over a 5-pin connector.
No it isn't. It's something non-USB using USB ports. USB.org has no info on MHL. Only Samsung can do USB data at the same time as MHL - and they use a non-standard connector.
For a simple charge-and-sync application, USB is fine, but there are no standard formats that include that PLUS video, audio, serial, etc.
For video & audio, there is MHL. Most high-end Android phones these days seem to support it via their micro-USB slot.
Mobile High-Definition Link (MHL) is a proposed industry standard
There have been 2 connectors used on phones so far:
5-pin MHL-USB Connector - description translates to not-USB over a USB cable, disabling any USB functionality
11-pin MHL-USB Connector - proprietary Samsung connector, using MHL and USB at the same time - but not using an actual USB connector on the phone.
And there's almost a dozen peripherals supporting this.
n900
Does what exactly? Searching Google doesn't show any hint of it doing audio over USB (neither analog nor digital for that matter) for example.