Evangelion
Aug 23, 11:45 PM
Steve Jobs knew this was a BS patent and it shows in his comments. Absolutely Stupid. Hell, the LISA had a Hierarchal File System.
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
Bottom line: Creative knew this was a BS patent, too, but they figured they had to try.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. Truem the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
The question is: Will they go after Microsoft, too? It would be hypocritical not to, after all.
If it's UI infringes on the patentt, sure. If it doesn't, why sue?
Creative is only worth $500 million, how come Apple didn't just buy them?
Because it would have cost the five times more than it did now? Because Creative has very little of interest for Apple? Because if they did that, everyone would be suing Apple with hopes that Apple would just buy them as well?
Wong Hoo to Creative engineer: "This is no good, i give you $1000000 more and i want something much much better"
unCreative engineer: "Wooo Hooo, thanks Mr, Hoo, i'll do it in 128 different colors, am sure that it will turn the market upside-down"
As Jobs said in his most recent keynote more money in R&D isn't everything, and if he says so i believe him.
Unless Woo has something extraordinary under his sleeve - which he doesn't cause if he did he would not need more money - i see Creative in the same position in a couple of years from now. And then they'll try to sue somebody else.
The article you are quoting was published two years ago....
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
Bottom line: Creative knew this was a BS patent, too, but they figured they had to try.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. Truem the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
The question is: Will they go after Microsoft, too? It would be hypocritical not to, after all.
If it's UI infringes on the patentt, sure. If it doesn't, why sue?
Creative is only worth $500 million, how come Apple didn't just buy them?
Because it would have cost the five times more than it did now? Because Creative has very little of interest for Apple? Because if they did that, everyone would be suing Apple with hopes that Apple would just buy them as well?
Wong Hoo to Creative engineer: "This is no good, i give you $1000000 more and i want something much much better"
unCreative engineer: "Wooo Hooo, thanks Mr, Hoo, i'll do it in 128 different colors, am sure that it will turn the market upside-down"
As Jobs said in his most recent keynote more money in R&D isn't everything, and if he says so i believe him.
Unless Woo has something extraordinary under his sleeve - which he doesn't cause if he did he would not need more money - i see Creative in the same position in a couple of years from now. And then they'll try to sue somebody else.
The article you are quoting was published two years ago....
iJawn108
Sep 14, 06:51 PM
http://www.yardwear.net/blog/content/binary/ipod-phone.jpg
:rolleyes: as if
:rolleyes: as if
JGowan
Apr 19, 09:33 AM
Between Samsung on the hardware and Google on the software, I can't believe anyone in their right mind actually saying with a straight face that the Samsung phone in question is not stealing from Apple. Get a grip.
CBGFilms
Mar 22, 01:44 PM
Perfect, just the news I've been waiting for. Currently have an Early-2008 model which I purchased in September just in need of a bit more power really! Also welcoming the extra USB ports and built in SD reader, Thunderbolt on the newer ones will be nice for an external HDD!
The built-in optical drive on my iMac seems broken too, keeps spitting out disks! :(
Looking forward to the new models!
The built-in optical drive on my iMac seems broken too, keeps spitting out disks! :(
Looking forward to the new models!
guet
Nov 13, 05:26 PM
They are licensed for use on a mac, not for distribution to a client machine be it an iphone, Blackberry or Android.
Please give us a link to the license specific to those images from that API, and point out where it states they are licensed only for use on a Mac. You can't because there isn't one. It's a grey area, however what RA were doing is not unexpected, and indeed, it's exactly what the remote app does from Apple.
Quite apart from that, it's pointless to argue over trivial licensing issues. Apple can probably get away with this in a strict legal sense; I'm sure they have some get-out clause saying they can reject any app they please for any reason. No one needs to play the apologist for Apple - if they want to play hardball, they will, and the only thing developers and users can do about it is publicise their complaint and move to other platforms.
The argument is not over whether they *can* do this and get away with it, it's whether they should. If they continue to make life incredibly difficult for developers, large potential partners will start to look elsewhere, and with them the users will follow. They've already lost Google due to their foolish intransigence, and will see less innovation in their maps app as a result.
Please give us a link to the license specific to those images from that API, and point out where it states they are licensed only for use on a Mac. You can't because there isn't one. It's a grey area, however what RA were doing is not unexpected, and indeed, it's exactly what the remote app does from Apple.
Quite apart from that, it's pointless to argue over trivial licensing issues. Apple can probably get away with this in a strict legal sense; I'm sure they have some get-out clause saying they can reject any app they please for any reason. No one needs to play the apologist for Apple - if they want to play hardball, they will, and the only thing developers and users can do about it is publicise their complaint and move to other platforms.
The argument is not over whether they *can* do this and get away with it, it's whether they should. If they continue to make life incredibly difficult for developers, large potential partners will start to look elsewhere, and with them the users will follow. They've already lost Google due to their foolish intransigence, and will see less innovation in their maps app as a result.
lokey
Sep 26, 07:46 AM
This would be great. My Cingular contract ends in November so I'll be able to choose any provider at that time, but an iPhone will keep me with Cingular. Also, my current phone is on it's last leg... exciting news!
Hardtimes
Apr 20, 01:08 PM
Just don't go anywhere
Steve
Sent from my iphone
Steve
Sent from my iphone
Tapiwa
Mar 22, 02:00 PM
I want to know where to get a list of products that hook onto Thunderbolt.
Rocketman
No problem, here's the list for you:
-
Rocketman
No problem, here's the list for you:
-
aristotle
Nov 13, 11:26 PM
Not quite. There are at least two other options. Fair use, and exhaustion/implied license/first sale doctrine.
The use is almost certainly fair use, and Apple's rights may very well be exhausted under the first sale doctrine. It's a thorny question of law since there is nothing in the Mac OS license that makes it clear what you can do with those icons. Apple would have been better off putting something in the development agreement about not being able to use representations of Macs, etc. But they didn't.
So your argument is that since a court of law would find this to be copyright infringement, it's covered by the development agreement.
My opinion, as an I.P. lawyer, is that it's not at all clear that it's copyright infringement, that most people would think it probably isn't, and that therefore the development agreement does not at all clearly forbid this sort of thing.
P.S.: You're saying developers just need to read the agreement. I'm saying they need to read the agreement, go to law school, and guess how Apple will interpret the facts.
Which law firm please. We'd all like to know for future reference, who to not trust our cases with. While most law has to do with the letter of the law, jury trials often are won or lost based on what the jury believes to be the intent or spirit of the law.
The british common law legal system was never intended to be like this. The lawyers have destroyed and twisted it beyond all recognition. It was originally supposed to be based on judeo-christian morals and ethics. There is not supposed to be a grey area. You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not. The original intent was to have a court case as the last resort where parties would first try to solve the problem by talking to each other, then go to arbitration and then court as a last resort.
*Edit*
Screenshots on other sites show airflow displaying a Firefox icon. That icon is definitely not covered any implied license through use of the API on the mac. Care to explain that to us Mr. Lawyer?
The use is almost certainly fair use, and Apple's rights may very well be exhausted under the first sale doctrine. It's a thorny question of law since there is nothing in the Mac OS license that makes it clear what you can do with those icons. Apple would have been better off putting something in the development agreement about not being able to use representations of Macs, etc. But they didn't.
So your argument is that since a court of law would find this to be copyright infringement, it's covered by the development agreement.
My opinion, as an I.P. lawyer, is that it's not at all clear that it's copyright infringement, that most people would think it probably isn't, and that therefore the development agreement does not at all clearly forbid this sort of thing.
P.S.: You're saying developers just need to read the agreement. I'm saying they need to read the agreement, go to law school, and guess how Apple will interpret the facts.
Which law firm please. We'd all like to know for future reference, who to not trust our cases with. While most law has to do with the letter of the law, jury trials often are won or lost based on what the jury believes to be the intent or spirit of the law.
The british common law legal system was never intended to be like this. The lawyers have destroyed and twisted it beyond all recognition. It was originally supposed to be based on judeo-christian morals and ethics. There is not supposed to be a grey area. You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not. The original intent was to have a court case as the last resort where parties would first try to solve the problem by talking to each other, then go to arbitration and then court as a last resort.
*Edit*
Screenshots on other sites show airflow displaying a Firefox icon. That icon is definitely not covered any implied license through use of the API on the mac. Care to explain that to us Mr. Lawyer?
jaw04005
Nov 13, 09:58 PM
sad, as the app store is 99% junk.
You�re right there. And what�s sad is Apple is chasing off (in this case) one of its best developers. Rogue Amoeba makes great software, and comes highly recommended from many people in the Mac community � AirFoil, Audio Hijack Pro, Fission, etc.
You know what�s interesting is while browsing around with my iDisk app on the iPhone, I noticed the iDisk app displays Adobe�s Photoshop icon for PSD files. I wonder if Adobe gave Apple explicit permission to use their Photoshop file icon in the iDisk app?
You�re right there. And what�s sad is Apple is chasing off (in this case) one of its best developers. Rogue Amoeba makes great software, and comes highly recommended from many people in the Mac community � AirFoil, Audio Hijack Pro, Fission, etc.
You know what�s interesting is while browsing around with my iDisk app on the iPhone, I noticed the iDisk app displays Adobe�s Photoshop icon for PSD files. I wonder if Adobe gave Apple explicit permission to use their Photoshop file icon in the iDisk app?
bazaarsoft
Mar 22, 04:14 PM
What I find extremely interesting is the LACK of rumors on the MacBook - it's the oldest Mac in the lineup and is extremely overdue for an upgrade (almost double it's normal product cycle). :confused:
syklee26
Sep 13, 09:36 PM
How do you figure this is an awesome design? This is a brainless design! Designing the nano in the first place might have been awesome. But making a nano a phone is hardly a leap of design genius!
And you mentioned chocolate and awesome design in the same sentence!!!:confused: :confused: :confused:
whether you like it or not, chocolate phone is one of the hottest phone in KOREA, the cell phone dynasty. and you have to note that chocolate in Korea and the chocolate in US sport two different designs.
and about that iChat Mobile....that phone is very practical but it might be way too big. and if they shrink the size, the keypad might be too small.
whether that rumor is true or not, i do think that the mock design by macrumors is the best way to incorporate both iPod functions and phone functions
And you mentioned chocolate and awesome design in the same sentence!!!:confused: :confused: :confused:
whether you like it or not, chocolate phone is one of the hottest phone in KOREA, the cell phone dynasty. and you have to note that chocolate in Korea and the chocolate in US sport two different designs.
and about that iChat Mobile....that phone is very practical but it might be way too big. and if they shrink the size, the keypad might be too small.
whether that rumor is true or not, i do think that the mock design by macrumors is the best way to incorporate both iPod functions and phone functions
berkleeboy210
Sep 1, 10:12 AM
saw a post on ilounge earlier.... that said this guy went to his local apple store, and they said to wait until next week (the 5th) because imacs and mac minis would have core 2 duos.
if this is true, then this event on 9/12 will most definetely be strictly ipod/itunes related. :)
if this is true, then this event on 9/12 will most definetely be strictly ipod/itunes related. :)
jrv3034
Oct 12, 01:08 PM
Unfortunately, your solution just doesn't work very well for actually solving the problem. A program just to educate Africans about how AIDS is spread would be an enormous cost alone. But I'm sure you're just looking to get flamed. Well, it won't be long now, just wait for it.
That post isn't even worth the time to flame...
That post isn't even worth the time to flame...
puuukeey
Sep 16, 12:47 AM
I have breaking news on the new super secret iPhone. here are some features just added to prototype #62QE91Z-004.2
� teledildonics
� 8 tracks of 88.2 kHz
� extra bnc outputs
� midi jack for ring tones
� 9 core processor
� stamps your passport
� microwavabe
� optional wood paneling
� tv and radio tuner
� dolby digital encoding
� brita filter
� updated version of manhole
� hypercard
� digdug
� dictionary
� todo list
� windows media support
� distributed processing support
� 802.11ntrails
� stereoscopic viewfinder
� soap dispenser
� silicon graphics core
� limewire, torrent, napster
� crank generator
� pet moneky
� built in projector
� band name generator
� bill gates voodoo doll
� address book preloaded with shrubyas rolodex
� built in ipod dock
� LEDS... LOTS OF EM!!!!!
� taste and smell sensor
� navigation system
� google maps
� zippo
more here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=233708&page=9)
� teledildonics
� 8 tracks of 88.2 kHz
� extra bnc outputs
� midi jack for ring tones
� 9 core processor
� stamps your passport
� microwavabe
� optional wood paneling
� tv and radio tuner
� dolby digital encoding
� brita filter
� updated version of manhole
� hypercard
� digdug
� dictionary
� todo list
� windows media support
� distributed processing support
� 802.11ntrails
� stereoscopic viewfinder
� soap dispenser
� silicon graphics core
� limewire, torrent, napster
� crank generator
� pet moneky
� built in projector
� band name generator
� bill gates voodoo doll
� address book preloaded with shrubyas rolodex
� built in ipod dock
� LEDS... LOTS OF EM!!!!!
� taste and smell sensor
� navigation system
� google maps
� zippo
more here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=233708&page=9)
Unorthodox
Aug 31, 02:57 PM
While I would normally agree, look at the MBP, iMac, Mac Mini, iPod 5G, iPod Nano, iPod Shuffle and iSight. These products have not been updated for a while and the product line is starting to get stale.
Thats true but... but....
When was the last time Apple released 7 new hardware products on the same day?
The iPod shuffle has one earbud sticking out of it's grave; so six, maybe....
Thats true but... but....
When was the last time Apple released 7 new hardware products on the same day?
The iPod shuffle has one earbud sticking out of it's grave; so six, maybe....
iMacZealot
Sep 18, 12:36 AM
because the p910 when released was a $AU1300 phone. i dont want to be paying for that TWICE (no phone is free. u either pay up front or you pay in your monthly contract) if i change carrier. you dont get a new Mac because you change ISP, do you?
If you sign up for two years with one carrier, then you better think harder if you're going to switch a few months later.
But CDMA carriers will unlock your phone. I haven't tried it, but I've heard of Sprint or Verizon unlocking phones. It doen't happen that often since it requires quite a bit of reprogramming, but it's possible.
If you sign up for two years with one carrier, then you better think harder if you're going to switch a few months later.
But CDMA carriers will unlock your phone. I haven't tried it, but I've heard of Sprint or Verizon unlocking phones. It doen't happen that often since it requires quite a bit of reprogramming, but it's possible.
MagnusVonMagnum
Mar 19, 03:38 PM
I hope you're getting paid well to post this crap.
Is there some reason you feel the need lash out at people?
Still, don't you feel dirty having to post references to obsolete "malware" like Leap-A and Inqtana-A that were never successful even before the OS was patched years ago??
You seem to be utterly oblivious to the whole point of the message which is that OSX is not invulnerable by any means, which seems to be the fanboy mantra of the week.
As for USB3 vs Lightpeak, your pitiful response makes me think you were one of the pinheads criticizing Apple for dropping floppy drives at the turn of the century.
Again, the childish lashing out of insults.... :rolleyes: You do realize they don't make your opinions look any better don't you?
The idea of dropping a drive that takes up space is one thing, but to include USB2 ports while purposely leaving out USB3 ports (which take up the same amount of space and are 100% backwards compatible) is asinine. The fact you would feel the need to call people "pinheads" who think in a logical manner rather than blindly worship Steve and everything Apple does tells me all I need to know about you, really.
This Mother#39;s Day craft is a
Is there some reason you feel the need lash out at people?
Still, don't you feel dirty having to post references to obsolete "malware" like Leap-A and Inqtana-A that were never successful even before the OS was patched years ago??
You seem to be utterly oblivious to the whole point of the message which is that OSX is not invulnerable by any means, which seems to be the fanboy mantra of the week.
As for USB3 vs Lightpeak, your pitiful response makes me think you were one of the pinheads criticizing Apple for dropping floppy drives at the turn of the century.
Again, the childish lashing out of insults.... :rolleyes: You do realize they don't make your opinions look any better don't you?
The idea of dropping a drive that takes up space is one thing, but to include USB2 ports while purposely leaving out USB3 ports (which take up the same amount of space and are 100% backwards compatible) is asinine. The fact you would feel the need to call people "pinheads" who think in a logical manner rather than blindly worship Steve and everything Apple does tells me all I need to know about you, really.
bommai
Sep 19, 05:52 PM
1) Thanks for reminding me, i forgot that fact.
2) But you'll happily have a RAID array and plug THAT into your iBook?
3) Yeah you said, a RAID array... a sort of external HD, but in an array.
4) If you take your iBook on the road with you, then how are the other people in your house going to access the movies and other media via iTV if its stored on your "RAID array" which requires a host computer to be of any use?
You have high expectations for Apple then? Its going to be some RAID array!
Rather than a RAID, what they need is a foolproof NAS (Network-attached storage). A NAS is basically a special purpose computer that has a network port (wired/wireless) as well as internal/external storage through USB/SATA/eSATA. For example D-Link makes a NAS that is compatible with uPnP as well as Bonjour. This box has space for an internal hard drive (ATA) as well as USB2 for external HDs. It has 802.11g wireless as well as ethernet port. You just connect is as another network device in your home and then you can dump your media into it from your PC/Mac. So, for people with laptops, you can buy your media or RIP them into the NAS and then iTV can use it. This can work well for people with laptops. iTV should be able to work off of a NAS rather than a PC/Mac.
The current versions of NAS may not be foolproof (Apple quality standards) and therefore this is a companion product that Apple could produce for home media storage. Another advantage of the NAS is that it can be near where iTV is rather than the computer since the bandwidth requirements for iTV are more important than for the computer. You don't want glitches while playing back media. So, you could live with downloading the media from online into NAS directly (through a slower wireless connection). Then have the NAS connected through wired ethernet to iTV.
Hope this makes sense!!
2) But you'll happily have a RAID array and plug THAT into your iBook?
3) Yeah you said, a RAID array... a sort of external HD, but in an array.
4) If you take your iBook on the road with you, then how are the other people in your house going to access the movies and other media via iTV if its stored on your "RAID array" which requires a host computer to be of any use?
You have high expectations for Apple then? Its going to be some RAID array!
Rather than a RAID, what they need is a foolproof NAS (Network-attached storage). A NAS is basically a special purpose computer that has a network port (wired/wireless) as well as internal/external storage through USB/SATA/eSATA. For example D-Link makes a NAS that is compatible with uPnP as well as Bonjour. This box has space for an internal hard drive (ATA) as well as USB2 for external HDs. It has 802.11g wireless as well as ethernet port. You just connect is as another network device in your home and then you can dump your media into it from your PC/Mac. So, for people with laptops, you can buy your media or RIP them into the NAS and then iTV can use it. This can work well for people with laptops. iTV should be able to work off of a NAS rather than a PC/Mac.
The current versions of NAS may not be foolproof (Apple quality standards) and therefore this is a companion product that Apple could produce for home media storage. Another advantage of the NAS is that it can be near where iTV is rather than the computer since the bandwidth requirements for iTV are more important than for the computer. You don't want glitches while playing back media. So, you could live with downloading the media from online into NAS directly (through a slower wireless connection). Then have the NAS connected through wired ethernet to iTV.
Hope this makes sense!!
8CoreWhore
Apr 25, 04:13 PM
Hilarious to all those people who jumped on the THUNDERBOLT bandwagon. No thunderbolt devices yet and they have the hideous old case design.
:rolleyes:
That you find that hilarious is embarrassing.
:rolleyes:
That you find that hilarious is embarrassing.
ChazUK
Mar 23, 04:35 PM
Wirelessly posted (Opera/9.80 (Android 2.3.3; Linux; Opera Mobi/ADR-1103211415; U; en-GB) Presto/2.7.81 Version/11.00)
Anything that may encourage someone to risk a journey in a car whilst under the influence of Alcohol/drugs be steering themselves away from law enforcement is wrong in my opinion. I say pull them.
Anything that may encourage someone to risk a journey in a car whilst under the influence of Alcohol/drugs be steering themselves away from law enforcement is wrong in my opinion. I say pull them.
teme
Oct 13, 02:47 AM
I think the red color is so much better than the other current Nano colors (pink, blue, green). It looks great... if they release a red MacBook, I might buy it. I don't need a red Nano right now.
striker33
May 3, 03:33 PM
But hooking it up to 2 apple cinemas (24") is ok, right?
Yes. As they both function as MDP ports as well as Thunderbolt ports.
Yes. As they both function as MDP ports as well as Thunderbolt ports.
JAT
Apr 11, 12:05 PM
Try proofing before posting articles.
"especially when there it is possible to be an officially licensed AirPlay partner."
They do appreciate notice of such things, but you could try using a friendly tone.
True, but if you've just spent �450 on the receiver and another �100 or so on speakers you'd maybe resent having to shell out more for AirPlay.
I've never quite understood the mindset that '$600 is ok for a PS3, $300 is ok for an iPod Touch, $2000 is ok for a pieced gaming rig, $200+$30/month forever is ok for a smartphone....but spend another $30 to get a necessary accessory??? You bastards are ripping me off!!' :rolleyes:
Also, people should really plan ahead and not expect others (say, Apple) to accomplish setting up their home for them. Expecting and whining about getting any speaker and any song on any device to communicate without YOU having a bit of forethought is silly. If you have 10 rooms with speakers, then set them up right with potential 'friends' iPods' hookup somewhere. Put your iTunes server on the most intelligent computer for whole house audio and set it up appropriately. You should be happy it no longer costs $10000+ to do such a thing. Whether it's a few AEXs or other means, you can get what you want, go do it.
"especially when there it is possible to be an officially licensed AirPlay partner."
They do appreciate notice of such things, but you could try using a friendly tone.
True, but if you've just spent �450 on the receiver and another �100 or so on speakers you'd maybe resent having to shell out more for AirPlay.
I've never quite understood the mindset that '$600 is ok for a PS3, $300 is ok for an iPod Touch, $2000 is ok for a pieced gaming rig, $200+$30/month forever is ok for a smartphone....but spend another $30 to get a necessary accessory??? You bastards are ripping me off!!' :rolleyes:
Also, people should really plan ahead and not expect others (say, Apple) to accomplish setting up their home for them. Expecting and whining about getting any speaker and any song on any device to communicate without YOU having a bit of forethought is silly. If you have 10 rooms with speakers, then set them up right with potential 'friends' iPods' hookup somewhere. Put your iTunes server on the most intelligent computer for whole house audio and set it up appropriately. You should be happy it no longer costs $10000+ to do such a thing. Whether it's a few AEXs or other means, you can get what you want, go do it.