Apple popularized the magnifying glass copy/paste. They nailed this function IMO.
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
It's official -- Note2 infringes says Apple
Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Apple popularized the magnifying glass copy/paste. They nailed this function IMO.
Skurge
Diamond Member
I actually only saw the magnifying glass just the other day for the 1st time. I always figured they did it like android, but it's completely different on both systems. I prefer the android one, but that's probably because I'm more used to it, but there really isn't any similarity between the 2 there.
Axon
Platinum Member
This is business driven litigation. Whether Apple won the most recent trial or not is irrelevant. Jobs overtly stated he felt Android was a stolen product and he was going to go all out against it, and I'm sure Apple's current leadership sees no reason to deviate from that plan.
From a broad enough perspective, all these products are similar, but now that they're going after the Note 2, I think Apple is going to have a more difficult time. Sure, they have a good jury verdict at their back, but this is a new case. Worst case scenario is they lose, best case is another jackpot. Why not? Their fans will continue to gobble up these products. They lose nothing except the
"respect" of intense net-nerds, who hated them to begin with.
From a broad enough perspective, all these products are similar, but now that they're going after the Note 2, I think Apple is going to have a more difficult time. Sure, they have a good jury verdict at their back, but this is a new case. Worst case scenario is they lose, best case is another jackpot. Why not? Their fans will continue to gobble up these products. They lose nothing except the
"respect" of intense net-nerds, who hated them to begin with.
There's a pretty stark difference between the two cases. Rambus promised their patents to be part of a standard, but then essentially reneged on that promise. They also started patenting things that were being discussed as potential features at the consortium meetings.
Also, unlike Apple, Rambus was a hell of a lot more successful. None of Apple's patents are capable of shutting down Android, as any time Apple has won, a work around has been created in a few weeks.
Most of that comes down to design patents, which usually protect a very specific look. There are some technical aspects which they have been able to patent, but those aren't all that important in the scheme of things.
As I said before, there wasn't a lot of new things in iOS. Perhaps the most radical change was the elimination of the physical keyboard, which hadn't been done before. Otherwise, you can trace a lot of the concepts and ideas in iOS back several decades.
It might be interesting to see what the mobile landscape would look like if iOS never existed, but I don't think it would change much. Android would still be around, and probably be a fairly big player since their model of free-to-use would be very compelling for entry-level devices. Maybe they'd all still have physical keyboards, or perhaps Google would be iterating as aggressively, but eventually they'd probably end up where they are now, even if it was a little later.
zsdersw
Lifer
They're certainly trying very hard to do so.
And bully for them, but they can't and won't be able to do so.
Hell, Google could have saved their manufacturing partners a lot of time and money if they just would have worked around those patents to begin with. That's why I think all of this is so stupid. Apple can't shut Android down and the manufacturers could simply prevent the lawsuits by making some minor tweeks. It's just a whole lot of trying to make the other guy blink.
BassBomb
Diamond Member
I love when Apple basically calls their own customers retarded by the fact they think people will be confused when they see other products and think it was Apple LOL
Companies will always copy each other. Whoever innovates the next company will do it better and faster. That is for software features. Hardware companies just try to get a leg up on the next.
It is like how car manufacturers each have to have the same interior features as compared to the next brand or else its a reason to go for the other option.
Companies will always copy each other. Whoever innovates the next company will do it better and faster. That is for software features. Hardware companies just try to get a leg up on the next.
It is like how car manufacturers each have to have the same interior features as compared to the next brand or else its a reason to go for the other option.
TuxDave
Lifer
Are you typing without thinking? So any company that holds a trademark considers their customers dumb? The point of the trademark is to make sure no one else uses symbols that'll confuse a customer that someone else's product was related to them. "Sounds pretty dumb to me!"
/I really need to get out of this thread.
BassBomb
Diamond Member
Have you seen the kind of shit they think "confuses" their customers? Who the fuck would confuse the Amazon app store with the apple one? Or that restaurant in Europe for an apple product
I don't think protecting a trademark is dumb, but some of these are ridiculous.
TuxDave
Lifer
Have you seen all the trademark lawsuits before the iPhone was even made? There's an ongoing forever-like train of trademark lawsuits. And there's more than a handful of stupid ones too. I would Google more of them but you can probably do the same exercise.
This one is more recent but here:
http://www.insidecounsel.com/2012/05/22/gucci-wins-trademark-infringement-cases-against-gu
I mean really, someone would get "confused" that a $15 Guess watch was a Gucci? I know Apple likes to say they invented a lot of stuff, but this isn't one of them.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=trademark+infringement+cases
Last edited:
zsdersw
Lifer
I'm still going to criticize them for trying to eliminate a competitor via the courts, whether you agree or not.
Or the other explanation is that they don't want their competitors using their patented inventions.
There's a difference between disagreeing that Apple should have received some of their patents and thinking that they're somehow trying to completely eliminate the competition. The first is an opinion subject to debate and can be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and encourage intelligent discourse; the second is an opinion that doesn't hold water upon closer examination. Otherwise they'd be going after far more companies, would still by filing new suits against all of the developed work-arounds, and wouldn't have bothered to settle with HTC.
zsdersw
Lifer
Statements made by the late Steve Jobs are Exhibits A, B, and C in why that opinion holds plenty of water.
Would that be the bit where he says he felt Android was a stolen product? Seems to prove my point more than anything else.
It also doesn't change the fact that none of the patents that they possess will be able to shut down Android. Also, there was a recent ruling in another case (I think the Motorola v. Microsoft case) where the judge ruled that Motorola couldn't get an injunction with FRAND patents. Unless that gets overturned, it basically means that no one is going to be able to shut down Apple either, at least not in the US.
It will either eventually end up in a settlement (like with HTC) or arbitration to settle any FRAND rates. No one is going to be able to take over the market, even though the tech news likes to pretend it will in order to get more page views with sensationalist headlines.
zsdersw
Lifer
It also suggests that Jobs wanted Android eliminated.
I don't care that nothing they can do will actually shut down Android... I care that they're trying to do so, whether they ultimately can or not.
Because he thought it was a stolen product. It's not very likely that he would have said he wanted to sue them into the ground if he didn't view Android as a stolen product.
It's not like Jobs woke up one morning, and as he ate his breakfast, decided on a whim that he should just eliminate Android.
zsdersw
Lifer
Why not? Jobs was a self-centered egotist who undoubtedly believed he could walk on water. Why wouldn't he want to eliminate his only real competitor in the smartphone/tablet war?
Jobs would never have apologized for something like the Apple Maps debacle. He did, after all, tell iPhone 4 users they were just holding it wrong. These are the actions of someone who, at best, bordered on megalomania... if not actually had a full-blown case of it.
Last edited:
cheezy321
Diamond Member
You have literally no clue what you are talking about. Get a little more realistic with your thoughts on Steve Jobs and maybe people will actually believe what you say.
Because it doesn't make logical sense even though Jobs was an egotistical asshole.
Also, he's dead and gone, and Cook is in charge. I wonder what he's had to say about all of this.
Source: http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/24/tim-cook-hates-litigation-not-quite-ready-to-call-a-patent-truc/
Seems to be what I've been saying.
zsdersw
Lifer
Last edited by a moderator:
zsdersw
Lifer
We'll see. If Apple continues to file stupid lawsuit after stupid lawsuit against Android nothing will have changed.
cheezy321
Diamond Member
Maybe because you are a self centered egotist who undoubtedly believes you could walk on water? 😛
Last edited by a moderator:
Chiropteran
Diamond Member
Oh I see. He *said* they hate litigation, so it *must* be true. That old saying about actions speaking louder than words must not apply in this case, I guess?
Hey guys, Cook said he hates litigation, that settles it. No possibility he could possibly be speaking for publicity rather than revealing anything actually true.
Did you miss the part where he said, "I just want people to invent their own stuff." or something? Apple believes that their competitors are using their patented technology, therefore they are suing. How is this difficult to understand?
And they settled with HTC. Or does that action not count because it doesn't fit with your point of view either?
zsdersw
Lifer
HTC is relatively small spuds these days... knocking them out doesn't really put a dent in Android; more to gain from them monetarily than from elimination.
Last edited:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
-
-
