Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jan 3, 2013, 12:05 PM   #226
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
I've been around longer than you then. Because I remember the world before the iPhone and before Apple made Apps "popular"

Not to mention - since this thread is about the App Store (not apps) I still say the popularity for virtual stores as far as Apple is concerned is the name iTunes.

Ask most people where they get their apps - they say I downloaded it off iTunes. How many people do you really know say I got it on the app store? Or Apple's appstore. Be honest. I'm not trying to antagonize - sincerely.

Almost everyone I know says they download things off iTunes. I bought it on iTunes. Check this app out on iTunes. Is that on iTunes? Very rarely do I (personally) ever hear anyone refer it to an app store

Quote:
Originally Posted by barkmonster View Post
I certainly have to be replying to it and all I see are a lot of nonsense about abreviations on old PDAs or people refering to obscure folders in the file system of non Apple OSs.

The issue is that Apple have a LONG history of running APPlications on their platforms and they created the APP Store based on that familiarity. The early iPhone ran the equivalent of Mac OS X widgets, not even full blown software but they were still refered to as APPs and as iOS evolved, APPs became full blown software.

It's no coincidence that Windows 8 has APPs not PROGrams like ALL PREVIOUS VERSIONS and other mobile platforms evolved to also run APPs, following Apple's lead, not innovating and coming up with their own term because it's so connected with the industry, it keeps features consistently named across platforms but they can't say they're not immitating Apple and neither can any other rational person with the facts easily available on a search engine.



Observance on my part, arrogance on yours for claiming that!
samcraig is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 12:40 PM   #227
barkmonster
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Lancashire
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
So, you don't have anything to back your claim.

Windows XP came before or after the iPhone?
History that's easy to remember or search for if you don't is all I need to back up not a claim but a fact.

Windows XP ran PROGrams from a PROGrams menu shortcut in the START menu while the Mac ran APPlications launched from the APPlications folder they reside in.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
I've been around longer than you then. Because I remember the world before the iPhone and before Apple made Apps "popular"

Not to mention - since this thread is about the App Store (not apps) I still say the popularity for virtual stores as far as Apple is concerned is the name iTunes.

Ask most people where they get their apps - they say I downloaded it off iTunes. How many people do you really know say I got it on the app store? Or Apple's appstore. Be honest. I'm not trying to antagonize - sincerely.

Almost everyone I know says they download things off iTunes. I bought it on iTunes. Check this app out on iTunes. Is that on iTunes? Very rarely do I (personally) ever hear anyone refer it to an app store
I registered here a full 8 years before you, I've being using Macs since 1993 and at every turn I see Apple taking the lead with interface ideas and interface consistency while Microsoft/Whoever simply follow their lead within the confines of what they can't be sued for (or can).

The fact remains, Mac users for nearly 3 decades now have being using their APPlications that reside in their APPlications folder and that consistency followed with the release of the iPhone.

I agree about people just refering to it as iTunes Store but Apple still have every right to the term "App Store" and it originating as the name of a store for buying iPhone Apps makes it obvious that Apple have the prior use of the term as it related to distributing mobile software.
__________________
16Gb iPhone 5 • 2.53Ghz Mac Mini (8Gb, 60Gb Vertex 2) • Icy Box IB-328U3SEb with Toshiba DT01ACA300 HDD
Mbox2 • LG W2343T • Samsung SyncMaster 913n
barkmonster is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 12:40 PM   #228
apple-win
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_program

Terminology

In information technology, an application is a computer program designed to help people perform an activity. An application thus differs from an operating system (which runs a computer), a utility (which performs maintenance or general-purpose chores), and a programming tools (with which computer programs are created). Depending on the activity for which it was designed, an application can manipulate text, numbers, graphics, or a combination of these elements.
apple-win is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 12:44 PM   #229
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
What does registration date here have to do with it? I could be 30, 40 ,50, 60, 70 years old. I could have registered yesterday. That doesn't equate to industry knowledge

The fact remains - the issue is about a trademark claim on app store. Not apps.

The courts disagree with you in some respects.

We can go around in circles all day. But I think I, personally, will stop here. Because it's futile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by barkmonster View Post



I registered here a full 8 years before you, I've being using Macs since 1993 and at every turn I see Apple taking the lead with interface ideas and interface consistency while Microsoft/Whoever simply follow their lead within the confines of what they can't be sued for (or can).

The fact remains, Mac users for over 2 decades now have being using their APPlications that reside in their APPlications folder and that consistency followed with the release of the iPhone.

I agree about people just refering to it as iTunes Store but Apple still have every right to the term "App Store" and it originating as the name of a store for buying iPhone Apps makes it obvious that Apple have the prior use of the term as it related to distributing mobile software.
samcraig is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 12:44 PM   #230
zoetmb
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plutonius View Post
But I also don't blame Apple for trying to get / enforce the trademark.
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
I don't blame them for trying. I just never thought they had a chance or that it should get the trademark.
I agree with the decision, but the reason I don't blame Apple is because Amazon managed to get a patent on one-click ordering, which they never should have received considering that it's an obvious business process and which Apple had to license from them.
zoetmb is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 01:03 PM   #231
apple-win
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Application programming interface

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applica...ming_interface

Application programming interface
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"API" redirects here. For other uses, see API (disambiguation).

An application programming interface (API) is a protocol intended to be used as an interface by software components to communicate with each other. An API may include specifications for routines, data structures, object classes, and variables. An API specification can take many forms, including an International Standard such as POSIX, vendor documentation such as the Microsoft Windows API ......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_api
apple-win is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 01:37 PM   #232
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premià de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by barkmonster View Post
History that's easy to remember
Then it is clear that you have a problem wuith your memory.

I stop here, talking with someone that the first think that calls others is idiots when it is clear that is wrong is a wasting of time.
Oletros is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 01:45 PM   #233
Vizin
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
.

Last edited by Vizin; Feb 28, 2013 at 12:58 AM.
Vizin is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 01:47 PM   #234
Geckotek
macrumors G3
 
Geckotek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NYC
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post
I agree with the decision, but the reason I don't blame Apple is because Amazon managed to get a patent on one-click ordering, which they never should have received considering that it's an obvious business process and which Apple had to license from them.
While I kind of agree with you, the discussion around Amazon's PATENT has absolutely nothing to do with Apple's TRADEMARK and I don't understand why people keep bringing it and "Windows" into this conversation as they are irrelevant.
__________________
Gecko Art | Facebook | flickr
Geckotek is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 06:05 PM   #235
alexgowers
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Program, application it's all a bit generic to be able to claim it as your own. Apple always names things very simply but Amazon could have named it loads of other things but they chose to make users feel as if they were getting the same experience or quality as apple gives.

I find Amazon underhanded in their approach to copying all aspects of apples successful content distribution model having been a digital seller for many years and not giving a nice shopping experience before apple came along and shook things up.

I'm not saying that it's a bad thing but amazon were in the market for a long time with a pretty crap store that was only successful because of prices that were probably set illegally anyway.

It all comes down to quality(usability) or price for a consumer. I prefer paying extra for quality and a brand, amazon is not a brand i really trust for quality but you can get generic products cheap.

I kinda think the court should have ruled that amazon should have changed the name to avoid confusion, app shop or anything else would have been fine.
alexgowers is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 07:14 PM   #236
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexgowers View Post
I find Amazon underhanded in their approach to copying all aspects of apples successful content distribution model having been a digital seller for many years and not giving a nice shopping experience before apple came along and shook things up.
Yeah, people! Apple invented nice!

Hell, they barely "copied" Apple at all. Like a online storefront is such a novel concept. Like Steam hasn't been distributing software over the internet since 2004.

The only thing Apple did was tie the storefront directly to their hardware. It was a successful move, sure. But ultimately only a slight tweak to an already existing idea.
Renzatic is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 07:20 PM   #237
wonderspark
macrumors 68030
 
wonderspark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Denver, CO
amazonappstore... Sorry, but that's how it goes.

The end.
__________________
Wait a second... So you're telling me anything that happens in the sky is legal, and there's a giant crime-blimp flying around this place? I don't know how I missed that.
wonderspark is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 08:15 AM   #238
Kludge420
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
And this has absolutely nothing to do with the App Store trademark. App Store is descriptive, not merely a generic word like Windows, unless you're implying Microsoft sells panes of glass.

----------



You mean the guys that came so close to winning in court that Microsoft paid them to change the name of the product ? I don't think that case actually supports your point. You should read how it concluded ...
And you should probably read my point instead of trying to argue someone else's and jumping into the middle of a conversation:

Microsoft owns a trade mark on the word "Windows."

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
Microsoft has a trademark on the words Microsoft Windows
Sorry but you're wrong, again. Microsoft owns a trademark on the word "Windows" itself.

http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal...rks/EN-US.aspx
Kludge420 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 08:26 AM   #239
Geckotek
macrumors G3
 
Geckotek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NYC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kludge420 View Post
Sorry but you're wrong, again. Microsoft owns a trademark on the word "Windows" itself.

http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal...rks/EN-US.aspx
How is that even relevant to this conversation? Unless I missed something and there is a pane of glass in your monitor, it's completely unrelated and pointless.
__________________
Gecko Art | Facebook | flickr
Geckotek is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 08:39 AM   #240
Kludge420
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geckotek View Post
How is that even relevant to this conversation? Unless I missed something and there is a pane of glass in your monitor, it's completely unrelated and pointless.
That's the problem with jumping in on someone else's conversation. It's not my job to fill you in on what we've already said, it's your job to go back and read it.

Ironically your own post is completely unrelated and pointless.
Kludge420 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 09:02 AM   #241
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kludge420 View Post
That's the problem with jumping in on someone else's conversation. It's not my job to fill you in on what we've already said, it's your job to go back and read it.

Ironically your own post is completely unrelated and pointless.
I went back through and read your previous posts. All you do is keep saying "Microsoft has a trademark for the word "Windows'.

Then someone comes in and says, "What's your point? Unless MS actually sells Windows, and has a trademark in the window selling business that keeps other companies from advertising their windows as "windows", then it's a moot point. It's a nondescriptive brand name for an operating system that has nothing to do with physical windows.

Then you turn around and say "You just don't get it, and you haven't answered my question. Microsoft has a trademark for the word "Windows".

And I'll tell you right now, it doesn't matter how generic it is so long as it's applied to computers and operating systems. Now if MS came out and released Microsoft Operating System, then turned around and sued tons of other companies for referencing their trademark with their operating systems, you'd have a point. Right now, you don't.

Windows is an operating system that uses Windows. They don't have a right to the word "windows". Any software company can reference actual GUI windows all they want. But they can't make an operating system called like, say, Apple Windows because MS has that trademarked. It's nonspecific enough they can get away with it.

Apple on the other hand has a store that sells apps they call App Store...
Renzatic is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 09:33 AM   #242
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Exactly, the whole of the "but Microsoft has a trademark on Windows" conversation is a complete red herring. It had nothing whatsoever to do with the topic at hand. Anyo e trying to use it was off-topic and just showed gross misunderstanding of the actual issues being raised in Apple's attempts to trademark and defend App Store.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 10:20 AM   #243
subsonix
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kludge420 View Post
Sorry but you're wrong, again. Microsoft owns a trademark on the word "Windows" itself.

http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal...rks/EN-US.aspx
A more interesting example on that list (which someone brought up here before) is SQL Server imo, especially given Microsofts claim:

Quote:
Microsoft also fought against Apple, arguing that 'app store' is a compound noun that is a generic characterization of the store itself -- a store for apps.
An interesting thought is why these companies are so keen on using the same name, trade mark or not.
subsonix is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 11:48 AM   #244
Foxykhat
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
I'm puzzled with the Apple should not have been allowed to trademark the work "APP STORE"

If there a specific thing/store that's created to sell "APPS" and you call it "APP STORE" shouldn't you be allowed to at least protect that, whether words are generic or not?!!!

The issue IMHO is not so much about the words but about the "product" for lack of a better word.

I see nothing wrong with them trademarking the word. With someone who deals with IP related matters daily I've seen a heap of generic words trademarked.

Take for example "CABLE & WIRELESS" a telephone company. Should they not be allowed to trademark the words "Cable" and or "Wireless"?!

----------

[/COLOR]
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul4339 View Post
It's a Trademark claim

.
Trademark falls under "IP" Intellectual Property", not Internet Protocol"

Foxy
Foxykhat is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 11:54 AM   #245
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxykhat View Post
I'm puzzled with the Apple should not have been allowed to trademark the work "APP STORE"

If there a specific thing/store that's created to sell "APPS" and you call it "APP STORE" shouldn't you be allowed to at least protect that, whether words are generic or not?!!!

The issue IMHO is not so much about the words but about the "product" for lack of a better word.

I see nothing wrong with them trademarking the word. With someone who deals with IP related matters daily I've seen a heap of generic words trademarked.

Take for example "CABLE & WIRELESS" a telephone company. Should they not be allowed to trademark the words "Cable" and or "Wireless"?!
I kinda went over this a few pages back, but to give you the simple, digest version, it's like this...

Someone trademarks the name "Grocery Store" for their grocery store. Admittedly, it's descriptive. You know exactly what "Grocery Store" sells. It's a grocery store that sells groceries.

Then one day, Bill decides to open up Bill's Grocery Store. He ends up getting sued for trademark violation, because Grocery Store already has a trademark for theri "Grocery Store".

So what else is he supposed to call it? Bill's Food Depot? That's nice and all, but what happens to the next person in line to open a grocery store? Bill's probably gonna trademark Food Depot, so this guy has to think of something else. Probably Mike's Food Emporium...which he then trademarks.

If it goes on and on, eventually people are going to run out of ways to describe their grocery stores. To avoid that, it's better to not let people trademark generic names that describe exactly what their store is. Not specifically. Grocery Store can't own the rights to the name "Grocery Store", but they can "Sally's Grocery Store", and Bill gets to use Bill's Grocery Store.

Apple wants the trademark to a store that sells apps called "App Store"...
Renzatic is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 12:03 PM   #246
Kludge420
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
I went back through and read your previous posts. All you do is keep saying "Microsoft has a trademark for the word "Windows'.
You didn't go back far enough or you didn't read it without assuming you know what we're talking about to start with. Here's a paraphrase:

MacRumors: "Microsoft also fought against Apple, arguing that 'app store' is a compound noun that is a generic characterization of the store itself -- a store for apps."

Me: "This is the same Microsoft that has a trademark on the word Windows?"

Other Dude: "Microsoft doesn't have a trademark on Windows. Also there is no cheese on the moon."

Me: "Yes, they do. Here's proof. Also I said nothing about cheese."

You: "Well clearly cheese exists so your statement makes no sense and has nothing to do with the tread."

Me: "Go back and re-read."

You: "All I see is you hating on cheese."

Me: "Le sigh..."

The End
Kludge420 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 12:05 PM   #247
Geckotek
macrumors G3
 
Geckotek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NYC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kludge420 View Post
That's the problem with jumping in on someone else's conversation. It's not my job to fill you in on what we've already said, it's your job to go back and read it.

Ironically your own post is completely unrelated and pointless.
Nope, I need no filling in, I've been in the entire thread. Your post is unrelated and pointless.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kludge420 View Post
You didn't go back far enough or you didn't read it without assuming you know what we're talking about to start with. Here's a paraphrase:

MacRumors: "Microsoft also fought against Apple, arguing that 'app store' is a compound noun that is a generic characterization of the store itself -- a store for apps."

Me: "This is the same Microsoft that has a trademark on the word Windows?"

Other Dude: "Microsoft doesn't have a trademark on Windows. Also there is no cheese on the moon."

Me: "Yes, they do. Here's proof. Also I said nothing about cheese."

You: "Well clearly cheese exists so your statement makes no sense and has nothing to do with the tread."

Me: "Go back and re-read."

You: "All I see is you hating on cheese."

Me: "Le sigh..."

The End
Nope, I was here for that as well and the point still stands....it's a red herring. You're using an unrelated issue to distract from the real issue that Apple trademarked a term that is generically descriptive of their product. "Windows" is not generically descriptive. Get it through your le skull.
__________________
Gecko Art | Facebook | flickr

Last edited by Geckotek; Jan 4, 2013 at 12:11 PM.
Geckotek is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 12:12 PM   #248
Kludge420
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geckotek View Post
Nope, I need no filling in, I've been in the entire thread. Your post is unrelated and pointless.
Please read the above post. I'll be expecting your apology shortly.

-- edit --

Just because you disagree does not make the point invalid and just because I disagree with you does not mean I don't understand you.

Your point: "Microsoft's trademarking of Windows is not descriptive of their product, i.e. they aren't selling actual windows."

My point: "Microsoft, who owns a generic trademark, is complaining about another generic trademark."

You could argue that I'm wrong but you can't argue that I'm irrelevant for the very reason that I'm making it relevant by implying, "Aren't these two similar?"

Last edited by Kludge420; Jan 4, 2013 at 12:27 PM.
Kludge420 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 12:12 PM   #249
Geckotek
macrumors G3
 
Geckotek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NYC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kludge420 View Post
Please read the above post. I'll be expecting your apology shortly.
Hold your breath.
__________________
Gecko Art | Facebook | flickr
Geckotek is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 12:22 PM   #250
Foxykhat
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
I kinda went over this a few pages back, but to give you the simple, digest version, it's like this...

Someone trademarks the name "Grocery Store" for their grocery store. Admittedly, it's descriptive. You know exactly what "Grocery Store" sells. It's a grocery store that sells groceries.

Then one day, Bill decides to open up Bill's Grocery Store. He ends up getting sued for trademark violation, because Grocery Store already has a trademark for theri "Grocery Store".

So what else is he supposed to call it? Bill's Food Depot? That's nice and all, but what happens to the next person in line to open a grocery store? Bill's probably gonna trademark Food Depot, so this guy has to think of something else. Probably Mike's Food Emporium...which he then trademarks.

If it goes on and on, eventually people are going to run out of ways to describe their grocery stores. To avoid that, it's better to not let people trademark generic names that describe exactly what their store is. Not specifically. Grocery Store can't own the rights to the name "Grocery Store", but they can "Sally's Grocery Store", and Bill gets to use Bill's Grocery Store.

Apple wants the trademark to a store that sells apps called "App Store"...
What you posted is a whole different kettle of fish. Now if Apple tried to patent the word "application" I could see your points. However, what we are looking at are the words "APP STORE" are in relation to the selling of "APPLICATIONS" in an online store". A shorten/variation of the word "Application", to give their product's name specific ring.

Had apple tried to stop the use of application" I could see your point. What they are doing is trying to protect the popularizing of the term they created that is "app store" Whether the two words are generic is beyond the point. The fact is put together they became something that was first heard of by this particular company.

If Apple's claim to the word "App Store" should not be allowed on your premise then Coca-Cola and such companies for trademarking terms like "GOOD TIL THE LAST DROP" or "IT ONLY GETS BETTER", because I can make a nice pot of soup for sale and state it's GOOD TIL THE LAST DROP. etc

Foxy
Foxykhat is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Judge Invalidates Two Samsung Patent Claims Ahead of Second Patent Lawsuit with Apple MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 60 Jan 23, 2014 01:31 PM
Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Over Apple's Location Tracking in iOS MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 56 Dec 4, 2013 02:19 PM
Judge in Brazilian 'iPhone' Trademark Lawsuit Rules in Apple's Favor MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 61 Sep 27, 2013 10:53 AM
Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Alleging App Store Monopoly MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 113 Aug 19, 2013 10:00 AM
Judge dismisses jury trial for Apple and Motorola case kdarling Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion 1 Jun 8, 2012 09:41 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:56 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC