Not quite the same, if it had read:
Google Music
Apple Music
I could understand your comparison!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google Launches Newsstand App for Android, Promises iOS App in 2014
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not quite the same, if it had read:
Google Music
Apple Music
I could understand your comparison!
And that was stupid.
Except it's the best name for it.
Seriously, stop trying to make something out of nothing.
I don't see the relevance of your post to mine. I was saying it was stupid that they were upset about somebody else calling something an App Store. What does your post have to do with that?
Also, I don't remember the fanboys going nuts when Apple (very poorly, mind you) copied Google into the Maps business.
Errr ... yes.
There's a reason why Google makes more money from iOS than from Android. :|
Wow, you are Simon Cowell of product name isn't it? You single handedly know that Newsstand is somehow the best name for such product?
Google picked Newsstand not because it's the best name, but it's what Android fanboys would've wanted. Pick a name that would generate a smart aleck response from Android fans such as yourself while riling up Apple fanboys yelling "copycat", generating free PR.
Sorry the post previous to that one on page 1 with regards to singing from the same hymn sheet.
They will because that's how they'll hurt Apple. Apple won't put any of their stuff on Google Play.
No problem then.
Better than what most people would do here and get angry.
MY HATS OFF TO YOU FOR YOUR MATURITY.
Not being sarcastic, I'm serious. Mature people are a minority these days.
But I'm sure they'll say that it was the best name.
----------
Yep, totally.
Or they used a real life thing that had the same function (like Apple did, amazing isn't it?)
Just like calling it "Maps", Newsstand is likely the best name, and Apple definitely doesn't have any right to exclusivity of that name. I have no issue with it, in regards to either company's actions.
No, no, we can't say Newsstand is the best name.
I mean ... that might mean they used it for another reason that isn't to copy Apple.
I wonder though. If we can't say it's the best name, why did Apple use it?
You've not used Google music have you.
If that one does't suit you, throw in Pandora, Spotify, Rdio, etc.
Then take Google Maps > Apple Maps.
My point, was to highlight the complete stupidity of nearly every post on page 1, where people are slagging Google off just because they aren't Apple. It's pathetic.
Everyone copies each other - Apple is no exception.
Last edited by a moderator:
Google Schmoogle...
If Google wanted to use Appstore without copying Apple's same name, saying it was generic, then they should only be allowed to use "app store". No caps and they wouldn't be allowed to combine them. Same with Newsstand. They should only be allowed to use "news stand".
Copy caters...... Geeze. Come up with something original on your own for once. Same goes with Samsung.
If Google wanted to use Appstore without copying Apple's same name, saying it was generic, then they should only be allowed to use "app store". No caps and they wouldn't be allowed to combine them. Same with Newsstand. They should only be allowed to use "news stand".
Copy caters...... Geeze. Come up with something original on your own for once. Same goes with Samsung.
Huh. Did I miss something? When did Apple open a physical newsstand?
Or did they not actually ever do that and you're trying to draw a parallel between a physical newsstand and software which would only make sense to someone who doesn't actually understand the whole trademark concept.
It's pretty simple. If software called Newsstand that delivers periodicals electronically exists, you can't create your own software that delivers periodicals electronically and also call it Newsstand.
Is that really so hard for people to understand or am I just some kind of genius? (I'd love for it to be the latter, but it's probably the former.)
Any form of Newsstand that sells publications is not subject to exclusivity or able to be trademarked by one firm. That's like Dole trademarking the term "banana".
EDIT: Barnes & Noble doesn't have the term Newsstand trademarked in the physical form, so why should Apple be allowed exclusivity in the digital form?
Generic names won't win many trademark battles.
Everyone knows what a news stand is. It's a stand that sells magazines and newspapers. They've been around since at least the late 19th century. But a news stand on a computer :jazz hands:? That's something entirely new. Something never done before.
It's common knowledge that if you take something that's been done a thousand times before and do it again on a computer :jazz hands:, it instantly becomes a stunning innovation, and you're granted exclusive rights to all terms and concepts pertaining to it.
It serves the same function. The medium is irrelevant when the function is identical.
EDIT: Maps is not a trademarked name, despite the fact that the tech moved from paper to digital form. Same concept with Newsstand.
Last edited: