“It’s no coincidence that Samsung’s latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging. This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple’s intellectual property when companies steal our ideas.”
Apple is in the right here. Certain companies just want to copy Apple's designs, slap Linux on them, and make money, and the only reason geek communities like Slashdot support it is because they run Linux, even though Slashdot has previously trashed other companies like Microsoft for ripping off people's ideas.
Uh, why would it be humiliating for Apple to protect itself from getting ripped off? Every company protects itself from this. As an Apple spokesperson put it: “It’s no coincidence that Samsung’s latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging. This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple’s intellectual property when companies steal our ideas.”
Even Slashdot has stopped another website from copying its content in the past.
That's a poor comparison. When Steve took over, he brought a bunch of NeXTStep people with him and killed off a bunch of products. The Apple of today barely resembles the Apple of the 90s. It's basically just NeXTStep with Apple's name and logo. Apple might not have been around today if that hadn't happened.
I know lots of people here like to parrot the nonsense that profit profit profit now now now is legally and ethically the sole objective of publicly traded corporations, but that's simply hogwash.
The sole objective of publicly traded corporations is whatever the stockholders want it to be.
They've maintained the mindset of a startup? Not according to what ex-Google employees have publicly blogged about.
Let's be honest here. Slashdot is practically a hangout for Google fans and is on Google's side in nearly every story. Of course the comments are going to be full of "no" responses to the question. In reality, Google hasn't come out with an innovative product in 10 years. Everything since has been either a me-too endeavor chasing a competitor or some engineering pet project. They have become what Microsoft was in the 90s, down to trying to get people to use Google-branded everything and pumping new markets with free versions of competing products that competitors can't afford to give away themselves.
Because of the negative emotional connotation "Microsoft" has and the positive emotional connotation "Google" has, people here will refuse to see the similarity, but objectively, Google is the flailing engineering company that Microsoft was criticized for being--unable to humanize their products, unable to lead markets outside their core business, unable to focus on things that are likely to be successful while saying no to things that aren't.
Until you can prove that the answer is, in fact, "no," your dismissal of the question is meaningless. Google is under a lot of fire these days. They haven't innovated in over 10 years; all there new products have been me-too follow-ups to competitors. Just because anonymous Google supporters on Slashdot don't want to hear any negative news doesn't mean there isn't something worth talking about.
The class envy that liberals use to try to justify taxes is intellectually dishonest. Just because you don't like rich people and think they're greedy doesn't mean the government magically deserves more of their money. The people living on 12 grand a year in the projects aren't somehow entitled to their money either. Income redistribution has never led to a stable, long-term economy.
But please, keep on ranting about "the rich." Having money and being successful is greedy and something to feel guilty about!
Obama's stimulus programs did nothing, and the bailouts ended up costing taxpayers. He even ignored his own debt commission. Hell, the Democrats have also been operating the country for two years straight without a budget.
Normal citizens, when they have a bad credit rating, try to get their rating back up by spending what they can afford, especially during times of economic hardship. For some reason, left-wingers think the correct response is to actually spend even more and then just tax successful people to make up the difference, as if the government suddenly is entitled to more of your money if you're more successful than others.
The debt is going to go up for trillions over the next decade. The "$2 trillion math mistake" is just one of the Obama administration's last-ditch efforts to spin it, but S&P was right to downgrade. The national debt has skyrocketed since 2008.
I'm sure retards are going to blame Obama, while ignoring the Republican asshattery that got everyone in this mess in the first place
Obama has raised the national debt by over three trillion dollars. He added more debt in the first 19 months of his presidency than all presidents from Washington through Reagan combined. If Obama supporters are really going to try to pin everything on Republicans, they're going to be in for a big disappointment in next year's election.
Because Obama was the one who took the debt ceiling hostage in order to force people to accede to his nearly religious-cult-obsession with never raising taxes to pay for anything, ever.
Obama raised the debt to astronomical heights in the first place. That you're so left-of-center that you think not raising taxes is a "religious-cult-obsession" really says something.
Slashdot Mirror
People use amp modeling plug-ins these days.
Actually, people these days are using software plug-ins like Amplitube. Hell, there's a version available for the iPhone.
Can you give examples of the inefficient functions and gross hacks in MAME?
Uh, yes, I RTFA, and "supportive of the process" is pertaining to id Tech 4.
Apple is in the right here. Certain companies just want to copy Apple's designs, slap Linux on them, and make money, and the only reason geek communities like Slashdot support it is because they run Linux, even though Slashdot has previously trashed other companies like Microsoft for ripping off people's ideas.
Just look at what Android phones looked like before and after the iPhone was released in 2007. At first, they looked like Blackberries, and then all the sudden, they all looked like iPhones.
Whose design R&D consists of a bunch of lawyers? Apple's? You can't be serious.
This is Slashdot, which means anything that runs Linux is automatically the protagonist, even if the product is ripping off someone else's ideas.
Uh, why would it be humiliating for Apple to protect itself from getting ripped off? Every company protects itself from this. As an Apple spokesperson put it: “It’s no coincidence that Samsung’s latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging. This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple’s intellectual property when companies steal our ideas.”
Even Slashdot has stopped another website from copying its content in the past.
What are you talking about? Samsung ripped off the look and feel of the iPad. It's Samsung that can't compete.
Are people really okay with companies just blatantly ripping off other companies? I thought Slashdot trashed Microsoft for years over that.
Just like Microsoft back in the day.
That's a poor comparison. When Steve took over, he brought a bunch of NeXTStep people with him and killed off a bunch of products. The Apple of today barely resembles the Apple of the 90s. It's basically just NeXTStep with Apple's name and logo. Apple might not have been around today if that hadn't happened.
Way to refute the points made in the article.
The sole objective of publicly traded corporations is whatever the stockholders want it to be.
They've maintained the mindset of a startup? Not according to what ex-Google employees have publicly blogged about.
Let's be honest here. Slashdot is practically a hangout for Google fans and is on Google's side in nearly every story. Of course the comments are going to be full of "no" responses to the question. In reality, Google hasn't come out with an innovative product in 10 years. Everything since has been either a me-too endeavor chasing a competitor or some engineering pet project. They have become what Microsoft was in the 90s, down to trying to get people to use Google-branded everything and pumping new markets with free versions of competing products that competitors can't afford to give away themselves.
Because of the negative emotional connotation "Microsoft" has and the positive emotional connotation "Google" has, people here will refuse to see the similarity, but objectively, Google is the flailing engineering company that Microsoft was criticized for being--unable to humanize their products, unable to lead markets outside their core business, unable to focus on things that are likely to be successful while saying no to things that aren't.
Until you can prove that the answer is, in fact, "no," your dismissal of the question is meaningless. Google is under a lot of fire these days. They haven't innovated in over 10 years; all there new products have been me-too follow-ups to competitors. Just because anonymous Google supporters on Slashdot don't want to hear any negative news doesn't mean there isn't something worth talking about.
Are you kidding? Britain in particular is way left-of-center.
The class envy that liberals use to try to justify taxes is intellectually dishonest. Just because you don't like rich people and think they're greedy doesn't mean the government magically deserves more of their money. The people living on 12 grand a year in the projects aren't somehow entitled to their money either. Income redistribution has never led to a stable, long-term economy.
But please, keep on ranting about "the rich." Having money and being successful is greedy and something to feel guilty about!
Obama's stimulus programs did nothing, and the bailouts ended up costing taxpayers. He even ignored his own debt commission. Hell, the Democrats have also been operating the country for two years straight without a budget.
Normal citizens, when they have a bad credit rating, try to get their rating back up by spending what they can afford, especially during times of economic hardship. For some reason, left-wingers think the correct response is to actually spend even more and then just tax successful people to make up the difference, as if the government suddenly is entitled to more of your money if you're more successful than others.
The debt is going to go up for trillions over the next decade. The "$2 trillion math mistake" is just one of the Obama administration's last-ditch efforts to spin it, but S&P was right to downgrade. The national debt has skyrocketed since 2008.
That's what the Google spokesman says. A crash would be very bad PR for Google's pointless self-driving car project.
You actually use the word "teabaggers?" Are you 12?
Lots of lashing out and gnashing-of-teeth from Obama supporters tonight. Attack, attack, attack. It's not going to change the outcome of 2012.
Obama has raised the national debt by over three trillion dollars. He added more debt in the first 19 months of his presidency than all presidents from Washington through Reagan combined. If Obama supporters are really going to try to pin everything on Republicans, they're going to be in for a big disappointment in next year's election.
Obama raised the debt to astronomical heights in the first place. That you're so left-of-center that you think not raising taxes is a "religious-cult-obsession" really says something.
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit represent the same god.
People keep posting these personal experiences without links.