The PADD devices seen on The Next Generation, DS9, and Voyager all did things that are major selling points for the iPad and iPhones.
* Touchscreen device
* Played video and sound
* dynamic user interface could be customized to serve the application
* Video conferencing
* Loaded and saved information to the remote storage (In this case the a ship or Starfleet computers would be "the cloud")
* Data could be synced between devices
* Device could be re-configured to remotely control a workstation (remote desktop)
* They even have rounded corners
* Devices could be encrypted
All of those functions are demonstrated or spoken of in episodes or described in Mike Okuda's ST:TNG Technical Manual (Okuda was the lead designer on most of the newer television Star Treks)
All of this predated any patent filings by Apple.
So which of those does Apple claim to have invented? And which of the many PADDs looked like any of Apple's design patents for that matter?
Why shouldn't a sci-fi show be able to qualify as prior art for design or UI patents?
Because PADDs didn't actually look like an iPad (most had all kinds of buttons)? Just like the device in 2001 didn't look like one, nor in fact the designs this guy presents?
And that's ignoring that they were non-working props (including the stuff of this guy)?
somehow he didn't sell several billion dollars worth of his tablets...
Next thing you know Star Trek episodes will be prior art.
Well, he never had anything but design concepts envisioning how others would build tablets in the near future. Like, ermm maybe IBM, who got a design patent in March 1994 for a Pen-based computer (which Apple references in its D504889 iPad design patent).
When will the web die? Will it be soon? Please tell me it will be soon!
QED.
So you take the last couple of words from a long rant against Google, and claim the whole thing to be against the internet, for which you have to equate "the web" with "the internet"? QED indeed.
And how have you prevented your 10 friends from syncing their address books through any 3rd party software?
He can't - that's why he doesn't want to give Google his phone number, so Google can't link his identifying phone number with the same phone number in his friend's synced phone directory.
Guessable emails? They're supposed to be public you know. It's not like you make your clients guess your email to contact you, do you?
"guess my phone number if you want to go on a data!"
Let me explain: the hacker wanted his (three letter) Twitter account, to get it he had to get into his Google account. He went to the Google account password recovery page, which obfuscates the alternative address he gave to send the recovery email to. And that happened to be the (despite obfuscation) easily guessable same.name@me.com. Mostly because a) he used the same name part for all email accounts and b) Google does a bad job at obfuscating the @me.com part - first three letters each of the name and domain part seems to be their standard, so for same.name@me.com they show sam******@me.***.
Yet it seems you're very happy to use the internet, whose death you so crave, to voice your opinion and grief about the internet you use to give voice to your opinion.
Seeing the contradiction?
Should I be worried that you take a rant against Google as a rant against the Internet?
The lawsuit involves specific models of phone in the US jurisdiction of the court. Here we are talking about global numbers and all models of smartphone. Your iPad comment likewise ignores this global vs regional, model scope discrepancy, and drags in the type of object confusion also.
So why is Apple fighting only the models that don't sell well?
Are you under the impression that SEA lost? They won, and forced Phil Katz to abandon PKARC. Not PKZip, which was what Katz came up with him after he was forbidden to use the SEA file format.
SEA won the battle, but Phil Katz won the war when the ARC format fizzled and died leaving ZIP as the predominant compressed file format.
I think the OP was saying let Apple win their lawsuits, they're still drowning in a sea of droids in terms of market share.
Errm, that would mean total annihilation of Android and all phones that look more than a bit like iPhones. All that with the expectation of something better rising from the ashes.
So "Apple Is Suing Every Android Manufacturer In Sight" - which amounts to 3 manufacturers (and one of them sued first). Which (even though Samsung is the biggest maker of Android phones) barely make up half of the Android phones combined - if that.
So which is the number Apple supposedly is worried about: 68% or 34%?
Congratulations! I knew some Google fanboy would try and turn this thread about Google wrongdoing into a rant about how Apple is in the wrong for dumping Safari on everyone - despite not doing that for over three years now.
But unlike for the third party crap that seems to be installed now with every updater (*) on Windows, by default it is disabled for quite some time now.
(*) the checkbox is always hidden in the graphics of the second to last pop-up window of the installer, or on the webpage somewhere far from the install-button. Adobe updates, Java updates, even WinSCP (IIRC) updates try to force some third-party dreck on me.
The titlebar of the update app saying "iTunes Software Updates." That isn't what it is.
AFAIK the program has always been called "Apple Software Update". And the the checkbox to install Safari has been disabled by default for over three years now.
Not that it matters now that Safari for Windows is dead.
No, poster is correct. It's called winsorising. It's common to toss out the top and bottom 5% just to discount anomalies.
But that is exactly what they didn't do. They only took out a low value state instead one low and one high. And they also didn't pick the lowest "below average" value (Maine, which had an actual all time record cold for that month), but that of the largest state with below average temp - which means more low station values to drop.
Google me all you want, the real answer to "mother's maiden name" for me is "{ah23#>K&Ep", which I store in 1Password.
Of course, that does no good if Apple simply ignores the security questions.
So to recover the password for your account you also stored in 1Password, you use a security question, the answer of which you take from 1Password. I can see no flaw in your reasoning.
The best use of security question is to answer them dishonestly/humorously with responses you will remember, or can write down.
Favorite movie? Gigli
First Car? Moon Rover
Mother In Laws Name? Dead
etc..etc..
Of course people will forget the right wrong answer, without chance to find it ever again. Which is likely the reason why companies have started to
allow a way around those questions in the first place.
I'd be satisfied with a Google "improvement" that allowed it to search on what you typed in without having to use quotation marks. It would also be nice if it didn't ask whether you meant Hancock when you typed in Hanock.
Oooh, how about not also searching for "similar" terms - including abbreviations which can completely derail a search. Eg. Pennsylvania == PA == Public Address - now guess what happens when you search for "loudness Pennsylvania". It doesn't get better when Google starts mixing languages.
Even Steve Wozniak says that Google voice search is vastly superior to Siri
Gosh, wouldn't it be nice if your sources actually supported your claim? Did Voice Search tell you they did?
1.Article: "The Apple co-founder,[said] that he was an early fan of Siri, but the app has gotten worse since Apple bought it." And why? Because it now also searches Google. No mention of Google Voice Search. The second article is basically just the video from the first.
Slashdot Mirror
The PADD devices seen on The Next Generation, DS9, and Voyager all did things that are major selling points for the iPad and iPhones.
* Touchscreen device * Played video and sound * dynamic user interface could be customized to serve the application * Video conferencing * Loaded and saved information to the remote storage (In this case the a ship or Starfleet computers would be "the cloud") * Data could be synced between devices * Device could be re-configured to remotely control a workstation (remote desktop) * They even have rounded corners * Devices could be encrypted
All of those functions are demonstrated or spoken of in episodes or described in Mike Okuda's ST:TNG Technical Manual (Okuda was the lead designer on most of the newer television Star Treks)
All of this predated any patent filings by Apple.
So which of those does Apple claim to have invented? And which of the many PADDs looked like any of Apple's design patents for that matter?
Why shouldn't a sci-fi show be able to qualify as prior art for design or UI patents?
Because PADDs didn't actually look like an iPad (most had all kinds of buttons)? Just like the device in 2001 didn't look like one, nor in fact the designs this guy presents?
And that's ignoring that they were non-working props (including the stuff of this guy)?
somehow he didn't sell several billion dollars worth of his tablets...
Next thing you know Star Trek episodes will be prior art.
Well, he never had anything but design concepts envisioning how others would build tablets in the near future. Like, ermm maybe IBM, who got a design patent in March 1994 for a Pen-based computer (which Apple references in its D504889 iPad design patent).
When will the web die? Will it be soon? Please tell me it will be soon!
QED.
So you take the last couple of words from a long rant against Google, and claim the whole thing to be against the internet, for which you have to equate "the web" with "the internet"? QED indeed.
And how have you prevented your 10 friends from syncing their address books through any 3rd party software?
He can't - that's why he doesn't want to give Google his phone number, so Google can't link his identifying phone number with the same phone number in his friend's synced phone directory.
Guessable emails? They're supposed to be public you know. It's not like you make your clients guess your email to contact you, do you?
"guess my phone number if you want to go on a data!"
Let me explain: the hacker wanted his (three letter) Twitter account, to get it he had to get into his Google account. He went to the Google account password recovery page, which obfuscates the alternative address he gave to send the recovery email to. And that happened to be the (despite obfuscation) easily guessable same.name@me.com. Mostly because a) he used the same name part for all email accounts and b) Google does a bad job at obfuscating the @me.com part - first three letters each of the name and domain part seems to be their standard, so for same.name@me.com they show sam******@me.***.
Suggest a phone that is 'significantly better' than the iPhone.
Right now that would be most, primarily on account of iphone being 3g, and most current android phones being 4g.
So you care more about the (not really) fancy 4G name than actual network speed. Figures.
Yet it seems you're very happy to use the internet, whose death you so crave, to voice your opinion and grief about the internet you use to give voice to your opinion. Seeing the contradiction?
Should I be worried that you take a rant against Google as a rant against the Internet?
2011 was the year of Linux on the Cellphone (Android) with over 60% of sales.
For very small values of 60%.
The lawsuit involves specific models of phone in the US jurisdiction of the court. Here we are talking about global numbers and all models of smartphone. Your iPad comment likewise ignores this global vs regional, model scope discrepancy, and drags in the type of object confusion also.
So why is Apple fighting only the models that don't sell well?
You should have read the article before posting your reply, as otherwise you might well be perpetuating stories the same way you decry.
You mean the article this discussion is about? The one that claims Apple is suing every Android manufacturer?
SEA won the battle, but Phil Katz won the war when the ARC format fizzled and died leaving ZIP as the predominant compressed file format.
I think the OP was saying let Apple win their lawsuits, they're still drowning in a sea of droids in terms of market share.
Errm, that would mean total annihilation of Android and all phones that look more than a bit like iPhones. All that with the expectation of something better rising from the ashes.
I'm not really sure that's what the OP meant.
So which is the number Apple supposedly is worried about: 68% or 34%?
Congratulations! I knew some Google fanboy would try and turn this thread about Google wrongdoing into a rant about how Apple is in the wrong for dumping Safari on everyone - despite not doing that for over three years now.
That how it works AFTER people complained. Originally Safari was in the same box as iTunes and checked by default. Like this:
http://blog.gordaen.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/quicktime_update2.jpg
But unlike for the third party crap that seems to be installed now with every updater (*) on Windows, by default it is disabled for quite some time now.
(*) the checkbox is always hidden in the graphics of the second to last pop-up window of the installer, or on the webpage somewhere far from the install-button. Adobe updates, Java updates, even WinSCP (IIRC) updates try to force some third-party dreck on me.
The titlebar of the update app saying "iTunes Software Updates." That isn't what it is.
AFAIK the program has always been called "Apple Software Update". And the the checkbox to install Safari has been disabled by default for over three years now.
Not that it matters now that Safari for Windows is dead.
And why? Because it now also searches Google. No mention of Google Voice Search.
Now, who's making stuff up? Siri doesn't use Google results according to this SEO.
Who cares if it doesn't, unlike you I was quoting Woz from the article. If you want to slam your own witness ...
No, poster is correct. It's called winsorising. It's common to toss out the top and bottom 5% just to discount anomalies.
But that is exactly what they didn't do. They only took out a low value state instead one low and one high. And they also didn't pick the lowest "below average" value (Maine, which had an actual all time record cold for that month), but that of the largest state with below average temp - which means more low station values to drop.
Google me all you want, the real answer to "mother's maiden name" for me is "{ah23#>K&Ep", which I store in 1Password.
Of course, that does no good if Apple simply ignores the security questions.
So to recover the password for your account you also stored in 1Password, you use a security question, the answer of which you take from 1Password. I can see no flaw in your reasoning.
The best use of security question is to answer them dishonestly/humorously with responses you will remember, or can write down.
Favorite movie? Gigli First Car? Moon Rover Mother In Laws Name? Dead etc..etc..
Of course people will forget the right wrong answer, without chance to find it ever again. Which is likely the reason why companies have started to allow a way around those questions in the first place.
I'd be satisfied with a Google "improvement" that allowed it to search on what you typed in without having to use quotation marks. It would also be nice if it didn't ask whether you meant Hancock when you typed in Hanock.
Oooh, how about not also searching for "similar" terms - including abbreviations which can completely derail a search. Eg. Pennsylvania == PA == Public Address - now guess what happens when you search for "loudness Pennsylvania". It doesn't get better when Google starts mixing languages.
I Robot is not nearly as bad as some people whine.
As a popcorn movie it was okay, but as something having the name Asimov linked to it it was a rape of everything he ever wrote.
Star Trek had a tendency to ignore human nature.
No it didn't. It showed mankind as how it should be, with the other races having all the flaws of man.
Mustard Gas is primarily chemical in its effects and it is weapon. I don't think anyone would disagree about it being a chemical weapon.
And Agent Orange is primarily chemical in its effects and it is weapon, as it was part of the "Operation Ranch Hand" Herbicidal Warfare program.
Even Steve Wozniak says that Google voice search is vastly superior to Siri
Gosh, wouldn't it be nice if your sources actually supported your claim? Did Voice Search tell you they did?
1.Article: "The Apple co-founder,[said] that he was an early fan of Siri, but the app has gotten worse since Apple bought it." And why? Because it now also searches Google. No mention of Google Voice Search. The second article is basically just the video from the first.