The Apple Thread - The Bear and Badger

Mod74

@Monkey It's hard to know what to think really. Samsung inherited the patent breaking features from Google/Android. But Google can't be sued* and Samsung should have used better due diligence/common sense.

It's been interesting reading which patents both were asserting and then using my Windows Phone day to day. You can see the clear instances where they've avoided or sidestepped the "Apple" way of doing some things.

*and had a mealy mouthed "fair use" defence against Oracle when they were sued.

Moto70

Mod74 the difference between the screens is massive. Somebody told me. To go for a 2 as tere wasn't that much difference, when he saw mine he was like "fucking hell, I didn't realise they were that different".

Mod74

I put the two of them next to each other in the store and you can see the difference easily enough.

I know my missus wouldn't care though in the same way you or I would. I'll wait for the New Nu iPad.

Moto70

Is there any news on the iPad Lite? I may just pick my missus up one of those...

M0stly harm13ss

Elmlea wrote:

Only issue with the iPad so far is that half my old iPhone apps were bought when my iTunes account was a UK one; so when I log into my now-US iTunes account on the iPad, there's only the last year's worth of download history. Plugging it into the iMac and transferring directly from iTunes solved that though. There must be some iPad-specific apps I've missed though. And is there an easy way to check if an app I'm using has an iPad version rather than the iPhone version, other than manually searching for all of them? Everything looks absolutely glorious on it. The screen's incredible.

Elm, if an app has both a standard iPad (ie not upgraded or HD) and iPhone version, then the correct version will be installed on the iPad automatically. If the app has a HD or xxx for iPad version, then you will probably have to install it manually.

Elmlea

Gotcha, I'll do some searching. Â Most things seem to scale, I've only found one thing so far that appears in a mini-pretend-iPhone in the middle of the screen.

I'm thoroughly enjoying browsing social media using Flipboard, but there must be a few more "must haves" that I've missed. Â Anyone?

Sasukekun

On the issue of the Samsung/Apple suit, haven't Apple been using a lot of Samsung software patents without paying a penny.
Samsung own many, a lot of which are to do with how devices communicate with each other, and Apple have refused to pay anything to Samsung.

Mod74

I believe they were dismissed as (in the case of wireless at least) Samsung had already licensed the tech to Intel who then sold/licensed it to Apple.

beano

lol.

Samsung make Apple retina displays.

Technology is dah biznez bitchez.

Sasukekun

Someone else has been keeping up with the trial more than me.
Apparently the jury didn't spend long enough reviewing the case, let alone deliberate the points raised and made their decision in record breaking time.

AJ

I haven't been paying much attention, is the whole thing as much of a farce as it sounds?

beano

Yes. Non-functional and functional software patents along with code copyright is a fucking joke. #whodathunkit

Sasukekun

Software copyright is ludicrous.
Unless the code is line for line the same, how can it infringe?

beano

Sometimes code is line for line the same bar a url. Also there's usually a best way of doing things that everyone uses. I still told a chairman about it when the americans made code copyright available a few years back as we don't allow it in the UK.

Sasukekun

Well then, surely that would infringe.
But, if the code makes the software do whatit to, but in a different way, I can't see how that would infringe.
I remember listening to a bid on the subject of the 'bounce back' software.
Apple claimed it infringed on it's patent, but apple hadn't patented it before others started using it, and Samsung's software did it differently

beano

It's all bullshit.

Mod74

I thought most of Apple's case was perfectly legitimate. The 'Trade Dress' of the iPad and even the iPhone chassis was horse shit though.

beano

Is it twitter that owns 'pull down to refresh'? That's another load of balls.

Sasukekun

Didn't the judge say that there's no way that Samsung ripped off Apple designs because Apple's designs were cooler?

I have no trouble telling a Samsung product from am Apple one, and I don't set how Apple can trademark the 'look' of app icons.

Blue Swirl

Elmlea wrote:

Dropbox does exactly that; it's always available and syncs when you're online, but if not you still have access, it's like any other folder.

Gotcha, I'll set that up later. Just want to make sure that my important documents are backed up somewhere else. I have an external drive I back to, but you can never be too careful with the important stuff.

Talking about iPads, I think if you're going to buy a keyboard for it, you should be beaten to death with a laptop. However, if you insist on buying a laptop that falls apart rather than folding shut, this is definitely the way to do it.

Wonderfully clever design. However, if I see anyone using one on a train, I will shove my MacBook up their arse.

Blue Swirl

Man, just looking at that makes me want an iPad. If Apple do GateKeeper for iOS (so I can install stuff that isn't on the App Store), I'm so having an iPad.

Now, I need a volunteer to shove my MacBook up my arse. Any volunteers? Can't be a hypocrite, now.

AJ

I'm right in thinking that thing is just a stand and case for the keyboard, the iPad will have to be carried separately, yes?

With regards to Dropbox, I did some research on those type of services for work a while back and Sugarsync came top quite easily; it lets you pick which folders you want to sync, rather than forcing you to put all your stuff in one place and drop aliases about everywhere. It also has a nicer icon, IMHO. If you want to try it, I believe using someone's referral link (like mine, conveniently available here:Â https://www.sugarsync.com/referral?rf=bs5vejpj27kef

) will nab you an extra half gig free storage or something.

EDIT: Fuck you, graphic smiley.

Frosty

So the jury fucked it then.

Awarded damages for things they decided didn't infringe and completely failed to read the jury instructions.

"We wanted to make sure the message we sent was not just a slap on the wrist," Hogan said. "We wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful, but not unreasonable."
Hogan said jurors were able to complete their deliberations in less than three days -- much faster than legal experts had predicted -- because a few had engineering and legal experience, which helped with the complex issues in play. Once they determined Apple's patents were valid, jurors evaluated every single device separately, he said.

Now the jurors are contradicting each other. Lordy, the more they talk, the worse it gets. I'm sure Samsung is glad they are talking, though. Had they read the full jury instructions, all 109 pages [as PDF], they would have read that damages are not supposed to punish, merely to compensate for losses. Here's what they would have found in Final Jury Instruction No. 35, in part:

The amount of those damages must be adequate to compensate the patent holder for the infringement. A damages award should put the patent holder in approximately the financial position it would have been in had the infringement not occurred, but in no event may the damages award be less than a reasonable royalty. You should keep in mind that the damages you award are meant to compensate the patent holder and not to punish an infringer.

The same instruction is repeated in Final Jury Instruction No. 53, in case they missed it the first time. Did they obey those instructions? Nay, did they even read them? The evidence, judging by the foreman's reported words, point the wrong way.

Mod74

I'd take anything printed on Groklaw with a pinch of salt.

google

I just want to point out that from a purely financial aspect, this will not impact either Apple nor Samsung.

26% of the iPhone is manufactured by Samsung - so the more iPhones that are sold the more coin Sammy get.Â

There is 'x' amount of money being spent on phones. Most of that money is going to either Apple of Samsung.Â

Samsung is getting money either way.

Mod74

Apart from the $12b wiped from their stock price of course.

[Deleted User]

I find this whole thing depressing. Imagine if all technology "advanced" like this -via lawyers. Imagine if radio/tv/internet was patented.Â

Fuck Apple. Greedy fucking bastards.

beano

The electronic frontier fuckers say the same thing.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/apple-v-samsung-what-does-1-billion-verdict-really-mean

Escape

SpaceGazelle wrote:

I find this whole thing depressing. Imagine if all technology "advanced" like this -via lawyers. Imagine if radio/tv/internet was patented.Â

Fuck Apple. Greedy fucking bastards.

It does reek of DayGlo trying to monopolise the colour yellow.

Funkstain

Does anyone know of a good analysis of patents and copyright in software and technology hardware? The EFF article just says: "patents covering a user interface are a bad thing, and hardware design should not be subject to patents or copyright.". I'm not arguing with it, but I'd like to understand a bit more about it.

It seems to me to be slightly utopian to believe that a company should spend years developing a great user interface, complete with several identifiable features that complement the whole experience, only to then allow a direct competitor to blatantly copy that user interface complete with the identifiable features.

Again, I'm not saying that's what Samsung has done (because I don't care, really), I'm just wondering if someone educated in such matters can explain to me why it is a bad thing to protect that work. It is a trivial exercise to locate examples where Apple has been the one copying others, so this isn't some kind of back-handed defence for them, I'm genuinely curious.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories