462 posts • joined Friday 22nd January 2010 13:53 GMT
Re: Details? Details?
I can only assume it's the utility patents, i.e. rubberbanding (now invalidated but thats not going to stop them), tap to zoom and how to figure out if someone is scrolling or trying to do a pinch!
Course it could also be the fact android arranges icons in a grid. The others rely on something physical, e.g. a bezel around the glass (FFS!). Although android probably does assume a equiangular quadrilateral and apple seem to think a rectangular shape is part of their trade dress.
Re: All your eggs in one basket
> must be awful to be in a house
Must be awful to live in a house where no tv or no internet means it's awful to be there. What you going to do if the electricity goes off, everyone going to hundle around your mobile until the battery dies?
Re: Asking for trouble.
How we miss Job's common sense to sort issues like this out. Just change your name, no big deal
slow death of VB.NET
Didn't even notice that it was even alive in the first place.
Re: This amount was considered an unusually high
Who by? Obviously the apple/ms but who else. There are no public details of what they charged other people. Is 2.75% really a high price for technology that their phones are bricks without? I don't know, I have no idea how much this tech cost to research and develop and I'm pretty sure no one else here does, if they did I doubt they can say.
But the real issue is, if they think a price is too high then negotiation is the key to resolving that. Apple are used to dictating prices to the their suppliers but for this technology there is no other supplier to trade each other off against and they are acting like spoiled children.
Re: What nonsense
Don't forget to cut off you nose while you are at it, that will annoy your face.
You are seriously going to let this affect your purchase of a TV? Even Apple still buy stuff from samsung. Still your loss.
since Windows Phone 7 became available two years ago
Could forgive them for not noticing, did it not peak at just under 2% share in the smart phone market?
Re: Profit != Turnover
A business with a 0.5% profit margin is not going to stay in business very long.
"replicating the shape of old forms in a new medium"
Eh, that'll be copying then?
Could try going down to 33rpm for a wee while.
No mention of
The fact that the court case in Germany should never have gone ahead, they started the action in the UK and jumped when things didn't look good. Not mention of the fact that germany rescinded the EU due to evidence tampering by Apple (never mind the fact that they did not have the legal right to as the UK case was the acting as the EU community court).
So if germany didn't pan out presumably they'd have jumped to the next country, Maybe teh netherlands? Oops, no their claim there was thrown out, no mention of that neither. Their statement suggests only the UK court decided against them, maybe they should keep a running scoreboard.
Re: Double standards
Just because something is frand does not mean it has to be given away. It implies they can not refuse to license at a fair price. Maybe you have inside information into how much these cost samsung to develop, how much they have provided those to other people taking into account similar costing for cross licensing.
The fact that Apple did not even enter into negotiations says a lot about their intentions and is nothing to do with getting the patents at a fair price. Who in business ever pays the first price someone asks? If you know someone send them my way please.
> ignore patents they didnt want to pay for, and hoped they would win in court.
No, patents they didn't think they should have to pay for because they don't apply or valid, that is what the court action was for. Apple have already acknowledged they need samsungs patents,. Do you honestly think the judgement against samsung in the US is going to stand up on appeal, assuming they've all not been invalidated before that point?
Re: See the difference
Yes, completely different. However, a fair and reasonable price means fair to _both_ parties, why should samsung give away their ip for peanuts for genuine technological advancements and pay a shed load for things Apple claim to have invented (and we are seeing those slowly crossed off). Remember, Samsung (and motorola, etc..) invented all the stuff that makes an iphone a physically possibility. The benefit of getting frand patents is you get a lot of people asking to license them, more customers usually means lower price, but there are still costs involved that need to be covered.
> apple MUST implement them.
If they want to offer a product that uses them. They still have to pay and they have made no effort to do so. Apple never even asked Samsung for a price, they just started using stuff despite the fact they knew they needed them, Samsung made them an offer rather than taking the legal route, apple ignored that price, didn't even try to negotiate and jumped straight into court. That is rather arrogant/childish behaviour if you ask me. The only effort they tried was to actually reverse the situation were they get them for free and actually get paid for their own dubious patents.
An before people start going on about a set percentage remember that the percentage was quoted after working it out from the amount actually wanted, not a fixed percentage they ask everyone, each company/product using the patents is considered independently and usually covered by cross licensing deals, something apple can't offer.
BTW, I own more apple products than samsung and I prefer neither.
Re: So far we have the following reasons for why the Samsung vs Apple trial was a sham
No the ones that they couldn't get through as Apple decided near the closing date to complain about samsung not backing up their email which would have had a huge negative affect. They spent so much time mitigating that issue they failed to file them, baring in mind apple were also slipping in other stuff right at the last minute.
Now, given that Apple also turned out to be guilty of not archiving emails, something that was not found out until afterwards thereby cancelling it out I think it's fairly reasonable to assume that was intentional, add from their point a good move. Then when you throw in the fact Apple where allowed to files numerous things late at various times and Samsung were always refused many observers would get an impression of bias.
Of course, the fact that a jury managed to digest a 100+ page legalese document AND answer 900 questions in such a small space of time that the judge was amazed and you still think it was a fair trial?
Re: Dynamic Advances picked the wrong sucka!
It should be, but the same applies to most the patents Apple are trying their luck on. Anyone else I'd have been hoping common sense wins through, but Apple are hindering the industry so much nowadays I always get a (little) bit of kick when I see someone tries it on
Re: So far we have the following reasons for why the Samsung vs Apple trial was a sham
Another. They were not allowed to use essential evidence/witnesses to defend themselves or bring up topics when questioning witnesses.
Couple this with
Apples patent on enforcing policy on devices in an authority controlled area (or whatever it was) and you won't be able to turn off the adverts.
On the good side, you can write an app to discover how many times people pick their nose in a day.
An average of 3 speed checking sites gave me a little of 12Mb/s
I think MS are doing the right thing and putting their customers first. Or maybe this is a scheme to make it harder for google to target ads to people and thus help keep google's share price below their own.
Re: Gawd almighty...
I compleetly agree with mark, The ainol tablets are pretty good, I've had almost 250 ainol tablets in the past few months not one dud one, mostly the elf II (which you can pick up for £75 retail) which is pretty good but the flame is fantastic gave one to my 3 year old who loves it.. Plus these tablets are so easy to update, drop the file on an sd card, plug it in, reboot and select teh file from the boot menu, job done! The only advantage apple would have is their retina screen but at a cost, and to be honest that advantage is soon disappearing.
Going to vote me down? Ask yourself a question have you used one? I've got a few of every apple iOS product with varying os versions as well as a whole raft of android devices.
Re: I think Windows 8 certainly surpasses it
I should think so, amazed it's took 17 years to come up with something better than win95 though. See you for the next improvement around 2030 then (hopefully metro has been scrapped by then).
Re: Best investment I ever made.
You beat me to it. I bought a bunch second hand (along with sinclairs, dragons, vic20 etc). First tiem I sold some I was getting loads of emails every day asking to close the auction and sell immediatly (before buy now came along), lowest was around £225, highest one went for £650 but that was in near new condition, had a ram pack + a bunch of add on circuit boards and parts. I Keep watching the classifields but never seen one for many years.
Only got a zx81 and sinclair printer left :-( My new collection is aging sun and sgi boxes, sun pizza boxes make great foot rests.
Re: Do Not Disturb feature
Nothing in android stopping a third party app doing that. I've got one installed to ignore calls/texts from a blacklist. I've sure there is bound to be loads in the store, just can't be bothered to look. If not let me know how much you want to pay and I may write one.
Area of patent
As mush as I dislike this idea and think it is far too obvious* to patent the examples of prior art do not cover what I interpret the main thrust of the patent. Where this differs is the application of policies enforced onto a device by 'whoever' is deemed to be an authority. There idea of triggering events causing consequences when a device matches some state, e.g. being in a physical location is nothing new but not come across anything that pushes those onto a phone, at least as phone features are concerned. Pretty sure cameras in Japan must have a photo snap noise made when a photo is taken but that is obviously explicitly done in software/hardware.
Not got time to read the details so can't comment on all possible issue with this, however referring to a previous comment, there are also legal considerations that would still have to be complied with, e.g. I doubt anyone would be able to prevent emergency phone calls.
* I think its obvious as given the need to implement this, this appears to be the solution that would immediately jump to most peoples find.
Re: "appearance and disappearance of some malicious Java archive files"
+1 Thanks for the info
Re: Still doesn't match Three's One plan.
Agree with you on three. I must use over 10G a month easily with tethering, skype, netflix and spotify. Signal is good too, round here at least. I've long since bothering switching on wifi when I've at home unless I need to access something behind my firewall.
Just wish they could come up with a reasonable fee when abroad.
Re: Nonsense fake numbers...
Cheers Joerg, can't decide if I should upvote you or not for the sheer entertainment factor.
Re: how feasible is it actually to swap SD cards
Very feasable and practical thanks very much.
"appearance and disappearance of some malicious Java archive files"
Out of interest any more info other than they came and went. I what way were they malicious?
Re: outlook better than gmail?
Depends on your point of view but to be honest neither are usable for anything serious. The odd mail swapping photos with the family gmail is good, other than that wouldn't touch either with a barge pole.
Re: .Set a root password
It would almost serve them right if they did get infected.
Re: Java exploits don't only work on Windows
True, the software would run on any machine with a suitable java runtime. However, most non-windows installations use sensible user permissions as default. Plus, the exploit code is going to be very OS specific so you'd need to have something explicitly targeting linux, osx, vms, ...
"was happily serving porn to the world" Must have a really good broadband connection!
"have no idea what the initial vector was"
So obviously you decided it was via java because you saw some jar file in a temp directory somewhere. Is this article reads like spin against java
Anyone running a machine that a company depends on should ensure that sensible user permissions are n place and virus checkers are up to date. Without these you might as well give up. Blaming a java browser plugin is just trying to distract from the underlying issue, the initial vector could be anything, true, even the java plugin. But if it had such a catastrophic affect as you made out then someone isn't doing their job properly.
Re: Cudly upstart?
@dx Never said Google are great, when it comes to it they can be as shit as the next big player, yelp is one example. Yelp gave way but pretty much had no choice. Last I heard about it google pulled out of buying it amid potential pending legal actions and they are now courting apple and MS, the cynical here could think apple reached out to get one over google (I do not however). Plenty more examples when it comes to google and copyright. I'm also more than happy to whinge when it comes to google paying, or not paying taxes.
I probably come across as a google fan as most topics on here are MS vs Apple vs Google. Out of those 3 google provides more to my business, or at least does not impact it as much. My business depends on all three and others, actually it depends on a healthy and diverse ecosystem, apple and to a lesser extent MS makes that harder.
However this, or at least as I read it was about google copying apple's ideas. Samsung vs Apple was nothing to do with google or android. Like I say, what in android is a blatant copy from iOS, i.e. a direct copy that couldn't be termed an obvious evolution? If anything I'd say developments in android have had a bigger influence on iOS than the other way around, but that is the way it should be, one
idea should feed and develop others, not put a stop sign preventing any further innovation in a particular direction.
Re: How low
I'd buy when the price is getting low enough for a google buyout.
Re: They don't have the advertising synergy
I agree AC, at least as they currently do it. But they do have huge potential for targeting ads for what people have written about. Not far off Google displaying ads relevant to what they glean from you reading your emails. If they ditched their CE like suggested above, brought in some expertise from goolge they could turn it around a bit.
Re: small percentage
I think I'd be looking to diversify the whole lot while I could still sell them.
Re: I know we're talking about shares here
It's good you took it on the chin and took it as learning experience.
Re: Like hell is Apple worried about bad publicity.
I hope the uk legal system gets it's arse in gear and rejects Apples appeal soon about putting up a 'Samsung did not copy us" notice or whatever the wording is on their website. Maybe in the long run Apple would have been better off just asking Samsung to do the same, i.e. explicitly stating their tablets are not copies of iPads. Might have prevented the alleged consumers who where buying one device thinking it was a different one and subsequently stop people now thinking a samsung device is a cheaper but functionally/technically identical apple device.
Re: Cudly upstart?
Forgot about that, Samsung could have used a quote about that in their defence. "Competitors are all trying to see what the best ideas are out there", pretty much negates apples argument about samsung's review of the iphone.
However, you obviously have a different understanding of the word blatantly. Can you name one feature from android that blatantly copies from iOS? MS where using clickstream data from google to help their searches, that is not copying, thats asking google to do a search on bing's behalf and passing it off as it's own. Not copying but plagiarism.
I say we tell the Ecuadorans they can take him, get the SAS to sneak in replace him with WIlliam Hague after plastic surgery to look like assange, send the real assange back to sweden with instructions if they don't want him at all to send him to Ecuador claiming a mix up and baggage handling and then bundle hague to the US to do what they want with him, preferably Guatemala Bay.
Fingers crossed we'll never hear anything from either of them ever again.
Seriously, "refused to rule out storming the Ecuadorian embassy", to paraphrase Judge Koh, has William Hague been smoking crack? Fair enough keep an officer outside and put him on a no fly list, but storm an embassy for him, get a grip on reality and put things into perspective. What about all the obligations the police have to appending your average criminal or the obligations the government has to running country rather than ruining it.
Re: Bad for free software
If google/apple achieve any agreement I'm pretty sure goolge will ensure any down stream android users would be covered. However, if they add things on top of android they will still be on their own. So I doubt this would cover Samsung and the recent debacle, most things there, if not all where not actually android related, more to do what they did with it, it could have been their own bespoke OS and it wouldn't have made a difference.
Re: shelves at Christmas
Well, at least their old products won't. Their new ones should be as long as they are not sold out as they were not found to infringe.
It's a topsy turvy world. One legal system throws apples case out of court and orders apple to apologise publicity, in the media and on apples own website. A judge bans one device believing it would be found infringing and a jury finds in in the clear but a bunch of older ones do.
I'm going to set up an international mediation copmany, once people agree to go with whatever I decide I'll flip my coin and judgement is done. At £1,000,000 a flip I'll save the industry an absolute fortune.
I'm sure anyone reading my previous comment would assume I'm pro google and anti apple. I like apple hardware, but prefer the freedom and choice I get else where and hate their war mongering and pettiness. I like the choice I get with android, can't fault the search engine and believe google have brought a lot to the table from a software point of view, which is much more than android (yes to a lesser extent, so have apple) but I hate their intrusive privacy policies (or lack of) and apparently flippant attitude to things (still not as bad as a 'it's just a name, get over it' comment).
I'm glad to see the two of these try to do something about it. I suspect Google will try harder than apple, if they fail to reach a settlement without a good try they are letting a lot of people down, on the flip side it's a shame that they need to. I really hope they can sort something out, all this childish behaviour is just getting in the way of progress and only making consumers subsidise a bunch of lawyers expensive life style.
Does this leave java 6 intact?
Don't have access to a windows machine (on holiday!), does this update insist on removing java 6 as part of the update on windows like the last update that went out?