887 posts • joined Tuesday 23rd March 2010 13:35 GMT
If Google rescued a cat from a tree it would get a downvote from El Reg commentards.
Re: Re: It might be unethical
MGale. so you know you don't have to download it? Then what's your problem? Nothing is being forced on you other than the convenience of not even being told you need to download something.
Re: THE WEB AS WE KNOW IT WILL DIIIIIIIIIIIIIIE
MGale The fact that people have streamed non-drm video using non-standard technologies pretty much blows your excuse of position out the water. If there is a standard DRM built into your browser then you won't need to worry about having the right plugins - that's the whole point of this. Why not sit and think about this for a while? Standards means that anyone can view the web on any machine they like, even people who aren't you.
Or maybe you're right. Maybe even there should be no standards which allow only the intended recipient to see the content. Let's ban SSL! After all, it was invented by a evil private company, not a standards body, so it can't be part of the *real* web, can it? We should ban that and any of those bank account access bullshit websites can just release an executable so their customers can do what they need to whilst the rest of us live in 1995.
Re: @Craigness Re: Re: There is only one thing to understand
AC. I don't have an agenda, except that the web should not be fragmented. If people don't want you see stuff without paying for it then they will find ways to make that happen. But if you force them off the web to do that, then then web will lose more than just the paid-for stuff.
Re: Re: Re: There is only one thing to understand
Jedidah. Yes it has.
Re: There is only one thing to understand
Separating you from content you've not paid for, or preventing you from distributing it, is not evil. People whose business model depends on being able to do this will not use HTML5 if it is not compatible with their business model. Instead, they'd probably release an app for everything and the web as we know it would be left to die.
Re: Re: Friending
An active account does not mean someone will be alerted that there is a message.
SMS just works
The main benefit of SMS is that you can rely on it being turned on at the other end. A few times I've received a Twitter DM on a Sunday morning asking "are you in town?" I probably was, but without 3G.
Re: Re: Apple fanbois worried clearly.
"trademark sale documents" schmocuments.
They were found to have infringed, therefore they infringed. Just like when Android encroaches too far on what Apple thinks is their territory in the smartphone market.
Why so "worried" about Google when everyone here is using Lastpass and Facebook is already the "login central" for the web? Can't you see what's already happened? Do you really have to manufacture this google hatred on every article?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Slide to unlock, oh grow up Apple
Actually, it's "first to patent" which matters, not "first to invent". Neonode did not make something which Apple's patent describes, because Apple's patent has an icon and Neonode's invention does not. But if Neonode had patented their invention then Apple's own invention may have been covered by Neonode's patent even though it wan't a copy, just because it uses a swipe action to unlock the device. In the same way, Android did not copy Apple but did infringe the patent.
Re: Re: Slide to unlock, oh grow up Apple
It wasn't copied. Other makers did something different, but it was covered by Apple's patent. If the Neonode makers has patented "a swipe gesture" to unlock the phone then Apple's would be a "copy". Apple patented "moving an icon on a predefined path" and others were found to be "copying" even though what was being moved on their devices would not necessarily be considered an icon and the path was not physically portrayed on the screen.
Re: How in hell can "standards-essential patents" exist?
These essential patents cover extremely valuable technology. Apple adds an extra $130 to the price of an ipad if you want a 3g chip in it! If the original creators of the phone market didn't have a way to claim some of that value then they'd not have created the market in the first place, and Apple wouldn't be selling anywhere near as much hardware as it is.
Already doing it!
The password creation feature is new but chrome has been offering to store passwords for a while now. You can have them encrypted with your email password or with a separate one.
If someone hacks your email (whether or not it's gmail) then you are vulnerable because all they have to do is visit various websites and ask for a password reminder.
That one stumped me too - Latitude *is* check-ins. I'd feel like an idiot if I told the world where I was, expecting anyone to care. Being the king of the idiots is no more of an incentive.
Considering Android now has 3 ways of unlocking a phone without sliding an icon along a predefined path (the Apple patent), I'd say it's relevant to ask why El Reg considers this patent a "stroke of luck" for Google.
1) Face recognition
2) The one in this patent
3) Earlier android phones used something which was unlike Apple's method but was covered by their broad patent. The solution was that, instead of an icon sliding, the whole screen was made to slide - in any direction. Slide it far enough and the phone would unlock, sending Apple's lawyers scurrying back under their rock.
Re: Re: "Maybe Google can use some of these ideas?"
Gmail and Apple both have integrated messages which allow you to see and continue conversations across devices. But the Mac one can only be used for people with expensive hardware whereas the Gmail one can be used by anyone with hardware. The Mac one can SMS in the same app but with Gmail that's a different app. The Mac one can't send email - that's a different app. The Mac one can't send facebook messages - that's a different app. The mac one can't send twitter messages - that's a different app. The mac one can't send messages to AOL users - that's a different app. The mac one can't send messages to MSN - that's a different app. etc.
What you've got is a message app which can only reach a very small portion of the planet and is less horizontally integrated than Gwibber, which is free and is available on laptops with no expensive aluminium. You've passed the point of being pathetic.
Incidentally, google's contatcs sync across devices (icloud is a bit like it) so if you have someone's phone number and google id then you have them everywhere. If you don't have their phone number you won't be sending them an SMS nomatter what app you're using.
Re: Re: Sounds familiar
AC, I was doing that too (but not automatically wia the web). As a way to demonstrate to the itards that this stuff is not new, and should have been available to them years ago, Gmail is a valid service to mention.
Re: Re: Sounds familiar
You can call phones from a Gmail window too. And you can send messages to people who are not online. But to be fair, you can't SMS to a gmail account (AFAIK, though it may be available in Google Voice) - you'll just have to hope they have their phone with them.
I thought I should point out that the functionality apple has belatedly introduced has been available in other services for a long time, because Apple users tend to think they are always first to get this stuff and everyone else just copies Apple's ideas. Then we get a load of idiot comments from people with no idea what's available outside their aluminium prisons. You've demonstrated the general iGnorance perfectly.
The integrated messages across devices will delight Macheads in the same way it's been a delight for Gmail/Android users for all this time.
The Share Sheets will make sharing on a Mac as easy as it is on Android (though maybe Apple will find a way to avoid duplicates sometimes appearing in the list).
Syncing contacts across gadgets has made life easier for Gmail/Android users for ages. I'm sure Macheads will appreciate the magical and revolutionary invention.
I hope they've patented all this so they can ban everyone else from doing it. Go Apple!
They all do it
Here's an interactive table of popular apps for iphone and android, showing what data they send to app makers and 3rd parties.
Apple's policy of reviewing code means that when an app sends your username and password to a 3rd party you're perfectly safe. You do use a different password for every account, right?
I can't see a remove tool on that page!
Probi ng Anal ist
Why would Apple not suing LG have anything to do with LG not suing Apple? Only one could copy the other, and LG being first to market means their product cannot infringe on Apple's design. You can't say the same for Apple though.
Re: Re: Popularity affects law?
There's hardly any point protecting a trademark against violaters who make so little money that there's nothing to sue them for. It's like with the Winklevoss twins - people complained that because they didn't sue Zuckerberg when facebook had a few thousand members, they had no right to sue when it had a few hundred million.
Re: Re: Que?
Nobody is claiming that the ipad is like the ipad, only that the names are similar.
You seem to be assuming that a negative comment on apple equates to support of google, even though google is not mentioned. If you were able to defend apple with facts about apple you probably would have done.
Doing a Microsoft?
Didn't Microsoft put pressure on PC brands not to preload Linux? Can't compete, won't compete.
How exactly did Apple pioneer "thin and light" laptops? Laptops have been getting thinner and lighter every year for decades. It's not surprising that Apple has the thinnest and lightest because they are the most expensive, but the idea of making them thin and light is not Apple's alone. Fat and heavy (all laptops before the Air): http://www.microstar.net/museum/cpqslt286.jpg
The voice thing is actually to do with searching multiple sources at once and bringing the data back as a single response. Anyone using distributed databases (Facebook, Twitter, Oracle, Google etc) could be in trouble if this one gets upheld. It's a good one to highlight the absurdity of the software patent system.
Have you been on fanboy sites? Most of them seem to think apple invented the smartphone and everything a smartphone does. They don't even know that Apple is claiming other people's inventions or even that android is quite a bit different to Ios, they just think the other players are copycats.
Blackberry in '99?
I had this on my 2005 Treo, but apparently it was available on blackberries 10 years before this 2009 page...
Ironically, the page is Android users demanding the feature
This article is about Google, not some company that sells your data. Google publishes targeted adverts on websites, they don't publish the data necessary to allow individual sites to provide their own targeted ads. If they did that their bandwidth cost would be higher and the value of their product would be lower. And they'd be accused* of making money by selling every little detail they can suck from people.
*by people with even half a brain
There are quite a few criticisms of Google based around the idea that it's impossible not to use anything which Google creates. Trust me, you WILL be allowed not to use Google's products.
The technology is already here.
I thought the whole point of getting Apple stuff was that you didn't have to care about computers. Not that this differentiates it from Windows in reality, but in the marketing that's what they're going for. Apple owners care more about fitting in than about computing.
As per the image on the first page, it's FANBOY. I don't know where the reg's "Fanboi" came from, but I think it must be French.
Can el reg auto-insert a FAIL icon for anti-google anonytards? all they ever do is fail.
"From Google themselves..." Turns out I understood it perfectly: google is doing all they can but there is a problem with what the carriers do.
Google didn't sign what?
"all this time they've been unable to make calls or something because we didn't sign it"
I know it's politically correct to be dishonest when commenting on google, but you should at least show some intelligence when you do it. The phones do work, and the signing issue involves the carriers. What can google do to make sure that a signed file from a carrier can be used on any ROM compiled by anyone with any signature or with none? Tell us that!
The last change in Gmail (other than improvements to spam detection) was the layout change a little over 2 months ago. 2 months is more than 6 minutes. If you feel unable to cope with the new layout then select the old layout from the Gears menu. THEY CAN'T MAKE IT ANY EASIER FOR YOU AND IT'S FREE!!1!
Shipping and video do what they always did
If you want to search for products then click the shopping link. If you want to look for videos, click the videos link; or just use the regular search for either like everyone else does. If you want to go to a Google product such as docs, Calendar or Youtube then click the other links. Google got all their customers by making everything so f*cking simple that even most reg commentards can use it.
Killed the shopping link?
No, they didn't. If you don't know how to go to google.com and find this stuff out for yourself then ask.
Gmail account setup step 1 of 5 is where you enter your phone number.
Why not go on YouTube and see what it's got? They have plenty of Tv shows and movies these days, and loads of official music videos. Even the amateur stuff can be high quality.
Google will have to do what others do to make money from Tv.