Have apple really invented anything?

[Niall]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFeC25BM9E0&feature=BFa&list=HL1345995511

Not a bash, before fanboys wet themselves. Watch it, it's really informative

[pctech]

  Niall

[Simon]

Haven't got 20 minutes to sit and watch it tonight, but will do tomorrow.

[Technical Ben]

It's both a yes and no, for those worrying about watching it. He seems fair (only 5 mins in, but his attitude seems balanced). It's the "everyone has a part to play" message. Actually, it's more "Apple buys these things from OTHER people, why sue them, try working together!" message too.

Kind of how I feel. I don't care too much what Apple invents and what Samsung does, more that it should be specific hardware/copyright issues, and not broad ones. Plus "making something smaller" is not patentable, unless you change the way it works also (see small screens, small laptops, small etc etc etc).

PS, love this revelation. A DOS pad!?! WOW.



And to balance the thread out... http://youtu.be/X0fsyb-ttcw

[pctech]

It's just a tool at the end of the day.

[Gary]

To be honest I don't really care anymore, Apple are arrogant but I like their products, Microsoft used to be arrogant and hated and I liked theirs, fanboi's and fandroids annoy the hell out of me, as does this huge amount of wasted money fighting over patents and who copied who. That's as far as it goes for me however, maybe I should care more but I don't, so if it suits my needs at this time in a way I find pleasing that's good enough for me

As to the thought about actually inventing anything, very few companies do unless its at the forefront of their technology like stem cell research for instance, and even then its sometimes ideas from many others brought together that generally result in breakthroughs, although there are always unique ideas and completely new inventions now and then, but as time goes on its getting harder to create something new that's never been seen before with smartphones and home computers that do not scare away consumers. Change is introduced at a pace to keep money rolling in and stop people running scared from how like to do things. New ideas are slotted into place at the right pace until it seems the norm and then we will accept, it seems.

There is technology for flexible screens etc out there and super slim electronic components that have great potential. To begin these with will end up being used in industrial and medical applications possibly, and eventually will trickle down to us. For now its down to personal choice, no one is right or wrong. People choose based on individual needs and desires and even what's fashionable sometimes and nothing is wrong with that. Infighting is bound to continue, but its really boring, how difficult our 1st world problems are. 

[pctech]

Just how do you go about differentiating a case that is designed to accommodate a circuit board that connects a microprocessor, baseband processor to handle the radio functions, speaker and mic and a touch screen with associated controller and video hardware?

Unless you make it a flip phone there is only one way to make it, the same can be said for tablets.

[Steve]

Surely it's about the design of the case not the contents, if the design is registered then that confers intellectual property, which you have copyright and a right to protect. A car has an engine , gearbox, seats, wheels etc but if Ford for instance built a Mondeo to look like a BMW then we'd see law suits between BMW and Ford.

[pctech]

My point is, how many variations on a rectangular box can you have?

This is the form factor the buying public prefers.

A car is not really a good analogy in this case because:

A car is a freestanding object which supports its own weight in terms of the chassis and suspension supporting the bodyshell, this means that a car designer has freedom to style the body as they wish, as the driver and passengers sit on seats mounted on the chassis it does not have an impact on the function of the vehicle provided it has the components described to provide transport from A to B, there are more limits to mobile telephone design because the customer has direct contact with the outside of the unit so it must be comfortable to use and in terms of touchscreen smartphones the rectangular shape has proven most popular, if they were to make it a different shape or say separate the components but link them wirelessly it may prove difficult to sell.

[Lance]

If you take a look at the Apple and Samsung phones you will see specific areas of likeness. One which particularly stands out is the bar used for the speaker used when held up to your ear. Both phones have implemented a 'bar' design. This specific design feature could be done differently to avoid any copying claims.

I think, Mitch, you are too focused on the rectangular shape (which itself can have variations) rather than the specific details. I've got three touchscreen phones. My old iPhone 3GS, my iphone 4 and my works HTC Touch Pro 2. My wife has a HTC Desire (another touchscreen. If you place these four phones next to one another, they are clearly different phones. Even the two iphones look different excluding the obvious parts (3GS has a more curved back). To say phone manufacturers are limited in what they design because they all have the same functions to perform is to a point true (there are only so many practical shapes), but that does not mean all phones have to look the same.

[Simon]

At the end of the day, all smartphones perform more or less the same basic tasks: Phone, email, texts, web browsing, camera, video, organiser, and now, it seems, Facebook and Twitter are being included as part of the OS on many models.  It's only the way they perform these tasks that differs from one to the other, and how easy and intuitive the operating system is.  Suing over the size and shape of speaker bars, and other such details, is, to go back to the car analogy, like Ford suing VW because they both have four round wheels.  OTOH, if VW copied Ford's dashboard layout and design to the letter, then Ford would obviously have an issue, just as one phone manufacturer would if another copied it's software layout and design.

I'm going now, as I'm boring myself...   

[psp83]

Yes they've invented how to be an arsehole!

I've heard iOS6 is coming with a new apps, they called iArse, iHole. Its all about how to sue a company 

Don't get me wrong, I have a few apple things but over the last few years they have pissed me off with all the patent bullshit!

I'm surprised they haven't tried to sue all the other all in one pc makers yet because they've copied iMacs.

[Technical Ben]

http://www.dailytech.com/Virtually+Every+Ultrabook+Appears+to+Violate+New+Apple+Patent/article24886.htm

Kind of gets silly with this kind of "patent" or "image copyright". By all means copyright a logo, a special design etc. But a "shape"? I think by law it should be more than 1 shape (car body work etc), not just 1 (phone bezel. ).

[zappaDPJ]

What we are really talking about here is more about a culture than anything else. Suing your commercial opponents for copyright infringement has become a way of doing business these days. Everybody is at it so everybody has to do it and it's certainly not just Apple.

[gizmo71]

I've heard iOS6 is coming with a new apps, they called iArse, iHole. Its all about how to sue a company 

S'okay, I prefer my iElbow.

[mervl]

It just seems to me that the matters in dispute seem to exactly correlate with the attributes that many consumers find appealing. So we should blame ourselves as the consumers . . . if we weren't so bothered neither would the companies. 

[Technical Ben]

I don't know, it's not my fault I find phones that don't have sharp pokey corners appealing.

Most of these things are now like tools. Patenting the "look and feel" of IOS is like patenting shoes that fit. Kudos for Apple for "inventing" it, and I'm certain theirs is better and will make the most money, but it's not something that can be "protected" or charged for imitation IMO.

[pctech]

I'll stick with my Nokia 300, it makes and receives calls and texts and is all I need really.

[Rik]

it's not something that can be "protected" or charged for imitation IMO.

Now, if Xerox had taken that line, think of the law suits which would have followed...

[Technical Ben]

But before Xerox, I'm sure a HR manager or accountant could have pulled them up on how the GUI looked like their work sheet for workers shifts or a question and answer sheet etc ad absurdum.

[Rik]

Dead right, Ben, ad absurdum...

[Gary]

I'll stick with my Nokia 300, it makes and receives calls and texts and is all I need really.

But you had a Android phone, Mitch? I remember you being very happy with it.

[Simon]

Several, if I recall correctly. 

[Gary]

Several, if I recall correctly. 

[talos]

I used to like Apple stuff, because it seemed better quality and an interesting shape.  But not now, they seem to be more interested in image than quality and these copyright cases have harmed them more than they know IMHO.  I liked the I-phone but I wouldn't buy one because of the price so I bought an HTC instead, it seemed to do all I wanted and has really become a toy rather than a tool which is what the Iphone would have become but an expensive one.

[pctech]

I did but the 3G reception sucked because some bright spark decided the 3G antenna should be at the bottom of the phone on the left of the case and as I am left handed my palm used to block it.