Not that this patent has anything to do with iTunes, but Apple didn't pioneer anything with iTunes. Just another me-too jukebox application except that Apple bundled it with their OS. The same could be said about the iPod's hierarchical menus and the function of the iPod itself, both ripoffs of existing products and the actual subject of the patent.
In my brief read of the application, Apple's not trying to patent its innovations, but rather it's trying to patent heirarchical menus on a portable multimedia player. Creative did that before Apple did. It's not as though Apple was first, or even early, to market with the iPod and its primary innovation in its UI was the scroll wheel (if you can call it an innovation at all).
So, to address you comments, Apple is not "inventing these great things" but rather is simply making a grab for IP rights on core technologies that its iPod competitors would always use. Despicable but how the patent game is played. Frankly, there's way to much prior art for this patent to ever be valid.
Not sure what specific ads of MS's and Dell's you're referring to, but when you can specifically measure the claim and it's wrong then this is what happens. Apple has a history of knowlingly and specifically lying about the performance of their computers. They lie about ease of use as well, but that's harder to prove.
What does it mean to be "marketed"? Opterons were on the market at that time, some in desktop boxes. Perhaps Apple could have said it was the first 64-bit machine sold by Apple. Then they would have been right without dispute. Anything else is just an excuse. Apple still doesn't support the 64-bit'ness in OSX, so "so what".
I don't see why people get so excited about it anyway. It's not as though Apple had anything to do with the development of the G5 anyway.
Not really. While the BIOS interfaces certainly have changed continuously over time, they always do so in a backward compatible manner. BIOS is part of the hardware and does not need to be provided in source form. Open source BIOS'es are useless.
If you can't load a kernel through the BIOS boot service, that machine should never have shipped. The BIOS code that does that does not change from system to system.
Slashdot Mirror
Not that this patent has anything to do with iTunes, but Apple didn't pioneer anything with iTunes. Just another me-too jukebox application except that Apple bundled it with their OS. The same could be said about the iPod's hierarchical menus and the function of the iPod itself, both ripoffs of existing products and the actual subject of the patent.
I'm sure they were appreciative when they copied it from others, though. Hierarchical menus, wow!
Good thing Apple thought up the mp3 player first.
In my brief read of the application, Apple's not trying to patent its innovations, but rather it's trying to patent heirarchical menus on a portable multimedia player. Creative did that before Apple did. It's not as though Apple was first, or even early, to market with the iPod and its primary innovation in its UI was the scroll wheel (if you can call it an innovation at all).
So, to address you comments, Apple is not "inventing these great things" but rather is simply making a grab for IP rights on core technologies that its iPod competitors would always use. Despicable but how the patent game is played. Frankly, there's way to much prior art for this patent to ever be valid.
What ad are you specifically referring to? When did Dell ever advertise that "the Celeron 2.4GHz as only suitable for word processing and e-mail"?
Entirely fair.
Not sure what specific ads of MS's and Dell's you're referring to, but when you can specifically measure the claim and it's wrong then this is what happens. Apple has a history of knowlingly and specifically lying about the performance of their computers. They lie about ease of use as well, but that's harder to prove.
What does it mean to be "marketed"? Opterons were on the market at that time, some in desktop boxes. Perhaps Apple could have said it was the first 64-bit machine sold by Apple. Then they would have been right without dispute. Anything else is just an excuse. Apple still doesn't support the 64-bit'ness in OSX, so "so what".
I don't see why people get so excited about it anyway. It's not as though Apple had anything to do with the development of the G5 anyway.
You don't see anyone taking issue with that?
The real surprise is this getting modded insightful.
You'll have a lot of pissed off people then. Biggus Dickus was funny but not worth the view otherwise.
Dogma was great. Life of Brian sucked. It has nothing to do with sacrilege. Insult without humor was all it was.
Not really. While the BIOS interfaces certainly have changed continuously over time, they always do so in a backward compatible manner. BIOS is part of the hardware and does not need to be provided in source form. Open source BIOS'es are useless.
If you can't load a kernel through the BIOS boot service, that machine should never have shipped. The BIOS code that does that does not change from system to system.
except possibly after nights of heavy drinking
integrity has to be earned and maintained continuously.