Amazon has Acquired Touchco - A Multi-Touch Company

[cmaier]

Altair 8800 predates everything.

And putting a shiny GUI on a computer does not change the fact that it's a computer. It's still doing basically the same things, just the input is different.




See above.

Edited to add: Look, I love Apple, but I'm just saying they don't create new product categories. Google is the same. There's nothing wrong with that - there's not a lot of stuff left to invent.

Now you're being silly. You changed categories again. The Altair 8800 predates the Apple ][, but it's certainly not a personal computer.

And you say "there's not a lot of stuff left to invent?" Uh huh: "Everything that can be invented has been invented."

--Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.

We should have closed the patent office in 1900.

 

[Unspeaked]

Now you're being silly. You changed categories again. The Altair 8800 predates the Apple ][, but it's certainly not a personal computer.

And you say "there's not a lot of stuff left to invent?" Uh huh: "Everything that can be invented has been invented."

--Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.

We should have closed the patent office in 1900.

Even if you exclude the Altair, you brought up the Commodore PET yourself, which was most certainly a PC and most certainly pre-dates the Apple I.

Still, aren't we grasping at straws when the only debatable example of a product Apple created was in the mid to late 70s, and their very first offering? What about the 30 years after that?

The only other thing I can think of that Apple truly invented was the PDA (Newton).

And my comment about everything being invented was a little tongue in cheek, but I still wouldn't say it's easy to make something completely original in 2010.

 

[cmaier]

Even if you exclude the Altair, you brought up the Commodore PET yourself, which was most certainly a PC and most certainly pre-dates the Apple I.

no it doesn't. It predates the Apple ][, not the Apple I, and by only a month or two.

The only other thing I can think of that Apple truly invented was the PDA (Newton).

Firewire. The first practical (affordable) floppy disk controller. First practical laser printer. Magnetic power connector for PCs. The list is actually quite long. Edison didn't invent the light bulb, by your definition. He just made it practical.

 

[Unspeaked]

no it doesn't. It predates the Apple ][, not the Apple I, and by only a month or two.

Actually found a pretty interesting site about the first PCs here:

http://www.blinkenlights.com/pc.shtml

Firewire. The first practical (affordable) floppy disk controller. First practical laser printer. Magnetic power connector for PCs. The list is actually quite long. Edison didn't invent the light bulb, by your definition. He just made it practical.

Making the first "practical" version of something doesn't mean you invented it. Further, many of these things - firewire, magsafe - are not products but features. External ports existed before - firewire made them better. Power adapters existed before - magsafe made them better. Again, back to Apple making existing things better.

 

[joachim]

Are you saying these are the only fonts on the iPad, or the only fonts in the iBook ereader software? If the former, I'm pretty sure that's incorrect, based on what Gruber says about it supporting more fonts than iPhone (including, e.g. Gill sans). Also, the 3.2 sdk has much better font support, allowing fonts to be added.

Those were the only fonts on the iPad as shown at the media event. If the update allows us to install any kind of licensed fonts from our machine, then the iPad would definitely become a stronger alternative as an eReader.

 

[dicklacara]

So you think that apple started developing iPhone OS in 2007 and released it the same year?

"initial release (of Android) October 21, 2008; 15 month(s) ago" (from you're linked article)

By your logic, iPhone Os predates Android by 1 year..

Nevertheless, apple has been working on it for quite some time too. If anything, I'll admid that, they are roughly about the same age.. Sadly, the "iPhone OS" page of wiki doesn't say ANYTHING about the OS's history...

So Android, Inc., with fewer resources started from scratch in July, 2005 with nothing... how prescient of Google to realize that by 2007 they could create a mobile OS from just an idea!

I grant you, that Apple was, likely, working on iPhone OS several years before the July, 2007 release.

I suspect, however, that the Android, Inc. founders were, likely, working on their OS several years before they were purchase by Google in July, 2005.

Is that incorrect reasoning?

For a little more insight, have a look at the brief bio of Andy Rubin, Android founder, from Wikipedia:

Andy Rubin started as an engineer at Apple Inc. in 1989. He later worked at a spin-off General Magic, where he participated in developing Magic Cap, an operating system and interface for hand-held devices. When Magic Cap failed, Rubin joined Artemis Research, founded by Steve Perlman, which became WebTV and was eventually acquired by Microsoft.
After several years, Rubin left to found Danger, Inc with Matt Hershenson and Joe Britt, which was later also acquired by Microsoft in February, 2008. Danger, Inc. is most notable for the Danger Hiptop (often branded as the T-Mobile Sidekick), which is a phone with PDA-like capabilities.
Disillusionment with his ouster as CEO of Danger motivated him to found Android, which was later acquired by Google and led to Rubin's current position with the firm.

The link is here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Rubin

It appears that the development of mobile Android may even predate the development of non-mobile OS X.

*

 

[cmaier]

Actually found a pretty interesting site about the first PCs here:

http://www.blinkenlights.com/pc.shtml

One look at the thing they claim is the first "personal computer" and it's clear they made up their own definition for the term.

Making the first "practical" version of something doesn't mean you invented it. Further, many of these things - firewire, magsafe - are not products but features. External ports existed before - firewire made them better. Power adapters existed before - magsafe made them better. Again, back to Apple making existing things better.

Then by your definition Edison didn't invent the lightbulb, and Bell didn't invent the telephone. So no one has ever invented anything. If you're going to just go making up your own definitions to support your point, then fine.

 

[dicklacara]

PCs were an established product category when the Apple ][ was invented? Really? What pre-built computer could you buy prior to the Apple ][? Commodore PET and what else? The answer: not much. Prior to 1977, pretty much all you could buy were kits you had to put together yourself, and a few pre-built kits (like the Apple I) that had no keyboard or display (i.e.: just a motherboard and maybe a power supply).

Before the Mac, could you buy a computer with a GUI and a mouse? Did xerox parc have drag and drop file operations? (no). Drop down menus? (no). windows that redraw themselves when you overlap them with something and then remove the overlap? (no).

For the record, I was computer shopping in March 1978 (bought an Apple ][-- had to wait 3 months for delivery, as the were in short supply). At the time there were several competitors:

--Commodore PET
--Ohio Scientific
--Smoke Signal Broadcasting
--NorthStar nee "Kentucky Fried Computers"
--Cromemco
--Digital Group
--PolyMorphic
--Helios

and quite a few kit or semi-kit 80xx-based devices that [mainly] supported the S-100 bus.

*

 

[Jayomat]

So Android, Inc., with fewer resources started from scratch in July, 2005 with nothing... how prescient of Google to realize that by 2007 they could create a mobile OS from just an idea!

I grant you, that Apple was, likely, working on iPhone OS several years before the July, 2007 release.

I suspect, however, that the Android, Inc. founders were, likely, working on their OS several years before they were purchase by Google in July, 2005.

Is that incorrect reasoning?

For a little more insight, have a look at the brief bio of Andy Rubin, Android founder, from Wikipedia:




The link is here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Rubin

It appears that the development of mobile Android may even predate or the development of non-mobile OS X.

*

sounds good .. let's just agree that the development of an operating system, no matter on which platform, takes a long time. Originally, I just wanted to mention it on a sidenode that Android "is not that younger/older ( ) than iPhoneOS, therefor you have to grant Android the same "right to evolve" that "you" give iPhone OS... agreement?

 

[Unspeaked]

One look at the thing they claim is the first "personal computer" and it's clear they made up their own definition for the term.

I don't really agree with the final choice, but there were some interesting products mentioned throughout the page...

Then by your definition Edison didn't invent the lightbulb, and Bell didn't invent the telephone. So no one has ever invented anything. If you're going to just go making up your own definitions to support your point, then fine.

I'm fine with that, as well. We're clearly not going to agree with one another on this, so there's not much point in trying to prove to each other that Apple did/didn't invent anything.

Don't even get started on the can of worms that is light bulbs and telephones - if we can't agree on something that was commercialized in the later part of the last century, I don't want to think about arguing over products that are over a hundred years old...

 

[sharkinfested]

...But on the other hand: amazon knows that the iPad is a threat to their ebook business. And this is just 'one' reason why they have every "right" (I use the word right 'cuz it seems as if macrumors member 'can'/'should' decide what company X should do) to improve their existing products to be competetive.. Just because the kindle has no touchscreen to date, does that mean it can never have one? Does that make them the (apple-)copycat?? just because the original iphone had no HDSAP, does that mean that the successor shouldn't have it too? (foolish assumption, isn't it? ) If they need to improve the hardware to a certain degree, that doesn't mean they WANT TO COMPETE against apple. IF ANYTHING, the iPad competes against the kindle, because the kindle has been released for quiete some time now. how can the kindle compete against the iPad if you cannot even buy the iPad??

the kindle has been the "marketleader" for ereaders since it's launch (I just claim that because this is what most people think who have no insight in the technical backgrounds... just as most people think apple invented multitouch.) new ereaders get released, but the kindle is, for the 0815 consumer, THE ereader.. they want to stay competetive. that's why any improvement to the kindle is highly welcomed.

Robert Kearns invented intermittent windshield wipers back in the early 60s. He shows them to The Ford Motor Company and they promptly steal his idea. The rest of the auto industry followed suit.
Kearns was embattled in a lawsuit that lasted nearly 30 years until he finally won his case.

And you know what? Consumers didn’t care. In fact this sort of thing goes on all the time in every industry and consumers don’t care UNTIL you’re talking about computers!
People constantly argue over which computer company did what first and which one stole what from whom. I don’t know how these corporations brainwashed us into taking their business practices so personally.

Of course Amazon has the right to produce whatever consumer product they want. Who knows, maybe they’ve invented a better mousetrap. Maybe they’ve come up with a way to stream the internet directly into our brains.
BUT
If they enter the tablet market they’d better have something major that no one else has even thought of because consumers DO care about this. When it comes to computers “brand loyalty” is fighting words. And this thread is a prime example of that.

 

[cmaier]

Robert Kearns invented intermittent windshield wipers back in the early 60s. He shows them to The Ford Motor Company and they promptly steal his idea. The rest of the auto industry followed suit.
Kearns was embattled in a lawsuit that lasted nearly 30 years until he finally won his case.

That's just the movie version.

 

[sharkinfested]

That's just the movie version.

lol

 

[Jayomat]

If they enter the tablet market they’d better have something major that no one else has even thought of because consumers DO care about this. When it comes to computers “brand loyalty” is fighting words. And this thread is a prime example of that.

At this point you're implying that kindle enters the tablet market. By what?
Making the kindle touchsensitive? Does that make it a "tablet"?

Is the kindle already a tablet? What is a tablet? That is the question we have to answer if you want to continue the debate.

Is it a computer which is only made up of a touchscreen, "flat" like a tablet?

If that's the definition, amazon is already in the tablet game, there is nothing to enter.

If not, we must speculate whether amazon will 'only' improve the kindle with a touchscreen and some apps (whatever they will be able to do), stay e-ink (dunno if that's even possible..) or go LED/OLED Qi-something.. (forget the correct name) or go "further"?... what if they "reinvent" by releasing a product with the qualities of an ereader and the capabilities of a "moooodern """tablet"""?

you see, we have a institute for media-information-technology (i dunno the correct translation) at university.. they use a flexible touchscreen-device... if you you flex the upper right (same goes for the upper-left.. for all corners in fact), it acts like book and starts flipping the pages.. the more-you-flex it , the faster it flips the pages.... if we can do it in germany (at our university it doesn't really matte WHERE they made it), why shouldn't they be able to aqcuire that technology and try to implement it in a real product.... would be pretty cool

(the release of such a product is just speculation at this point... interesting enough anyway)

 

[cmaier]

At this point you're implying that kindle enters the tablet market. By what?
Making the kindle touchsensitive? Does that make it a "tablet"?

Is the kindle already a tablet? What is a tablet? That is the question we have to answer if you want to continue the debate.

Is a it a computer which is only made up of a touchscreen, "flat" like a tablet?

If that's the definition, amazon is already in the tablet game, there is nothing to enter.

If not, we must speculate whether amazon will 'only' improve the kindle with a touchscreen and some apps (whatever they will be able to do), stay e-ink (dunno if that's even possible..) or go LED/OLED Qi-something.. (forget the correct name) or go "further"?... what if they "reinvent" by releasing a product with the qualities of an ereader and the capabilities of a "moooodern """tablet"""?

The question is - why do this? they are not a computer company. They sell kindles only to get people to buy ebooks from them. And they do that only because they don't want their physical book sales cannibalized by ebook sales from other purveyors.

Amazon should be keeping in mind that they want to sell digital downloads, and focus on their core competency. To this end they should keep kindles as cheap as possible, bringing the price down to zero if they can. They should make their bookstore the preferred location for every ebook purchaser, either by price, selection, or something else. They should make it so their ebooks can be read on every device out there - they need to make amazon.com more pleasant and desirable than the iBookstore.

Instead they are pissing off publishers (Macmillan) and customers (who wanted to buy macmillan, who can't figure out how many devices their ebooks can be on, who can't figure out when amazon may revoke the rights to their books, etc.), and doing things that can only result in the price of the kindles going up (or perhaps staying constant) and making Apple, who will soon probably be the "ebook reader" market share leader, the enemy.

 

[sharkinfested]

At this point you're implying that kindle enters the tablet market. By what?
Making the kindle touchsensitive? Does that make it a "tablet"?

Is the kindle already a tablet? What is a tablet? That is the question we have to answer if you want to continue the debate.

Is it a computer which is only made up of a touchscreen, "flat" like a tablet?

If that's the definition, amazon is already in the tablet game, there is nothing to enter.

If not, we must speculate whether amazon will 'only' improve the kindle with a touchscreen and some apps (whatever they will be able to do), stay e-ink (dunno if that's even possible..) or go LED/OLED Qi-something.. (forget the correct name) or go "further"?... what if they "reinvent" by releasing a product with the qualities of an ereader and the capabilities of a "moooodern """tablet"""?

you see, we have a institute for media-information-technology (i dunno the correct translation) at university.. they use a flexible touchscreen-device... if you you flex the upper right (same goes for the upper-left.. for all corners in fact), it acts like book and starts flipping the pages.. the more-you-flex it , the faster it flips the pages.... if we can do it in germany (at our university it doesn't really matte WHERE they made it), why shouldn't they be able to aqcuire that technology and try to implement it in a real product.... would be pretty cool

(the release of such a product is just speculation at this point... interesting enough anyway)

No, I’m saying that I think if Amazon comes up with a slate PC type thing that is in direct competition with the iPad, the HP Slate, and all these new computer tablets; they’d better have something that blows us away. Because anything short of mind-blowing and people will dismiss it – ie. Apple folks will stay with iPad and Windows folks with stay with one of these slate PCs running Windows 7… and I guess Linux guys will choose Android.

Just making the Kindle touch sensitive… well, that probably won’t get me to buy it. But whatever they do, if it stays pretty much like a Kindle and the pricing goes up… I think that would be very bad.

On the other hand, my sister owns a 1st gen Kindle and she LOVES it. I mentioned that I’m planning to get the iPad and told her all about the iBooks, then I told her about all these Slate PCs that are coming out. (She’s older and doesn’t follow all this stuff)
Anyway she said she didn’t care about any other functions. Weight was her biggest issue. She said if any of those devices were an ounce more than her Kindle she wouldn’t ever buy one. Maybe there are more people like her than I realize.

 

[sharkinfested]

you see, we have a institute for media-information-technology (i dunno the correct translation) at university.. they use a flexible touchscreen-device... if you you flex the upper right (same goes for the upper-left.. for all corners in fact), it acts like book and starts flipping the pages.. the more-you-flex it , the faster it flips the pages.... if we can do it in germany (at our university it doesn't really matte WHERE they made it), why shouldn't they be able to aqcuire that technology and try to implement it in a real product.... would be pretty cool

(the release of such a product is just speculation at this point... interesting enough anyway)

Now see, THAT would be something cool. People have talked about these flexible screens and I know they exist – Entertainment Weekly used one for video playback on of their magazine issues.

If the Kindle was the first to come out with something like that, with a flexible screen or heck a flexible Kindle: You could fold the thing up and stick it in your pocket…
That’s mind-blowing – and I bet people would buy it.

 

[dicklacara]

sounds good .. let's just agree that the development of an operating system, no matter on which platform, takes a long time. Originally, I just wanted to mention it on a sidenode that Android "is not that younger/older ( ) than iPhoneOS, therefor you have to grant Android the same "right to evolve" that "you" give iPhone OS... agreement?

Points well made!

Absolute agreement!

*

 

[dicklacara]

One look at the thing they claim is the first "personal computer" and it's clear they made up their own definition for the term.

What you say is quite true!

The Commodore Pet and the Trash-80 (Radio Shack TRS-80) were "complete" computers (fully functional as-is)-- they contained the computer as well as keyboard, display and tape deck I/O (cassette recorder).

The Apple ][ was a computer and a keyboard in a case. You had to separately purchase/add:

-- an RF modulator
-- an external display (TV)
-- a cassette tape recorder.

So, yes, Apple appropriated the claim to "first personal computer."

But, then, the survivors get to write the history! (after old farts like me die off, there will be no one to challenge them).

*

 

[cmaier]

What you say is quite true!

The Commodore Pet and the Trash-80 (Radio Shack TRS-80) were "complete" computers (fully functional as-is)-- they contained the computer as well as keyboard, display and tape deck I/O (cassette recorder).

The Apple ][ was a computer and a keyboard in a case. You had to separately purchase/add:

-- an RF modulator
-- an external display (TV)
-- a cassette tape recorder.

So, yes, Apple appropriated the claim to "first personal computer."

But, then, the survivors get to write the history! (after old farts like me die off, there will be no one to challenge them).

*

The TRS-80 came out after the Apple ][. And if a display is necessary for it to be called a "PC," then the Mac Mini, the Mac Pro, and most PCs aren't PCs?

And I learned computing on a Trash-80 model 1. The cassette barely worked. You had to twiddle with the volume, save multiple times and hope one save worked, and figure out where to rewind to on your own. It was a mess. Shouldn't even count it

 

[Jayomat]

The question is - why do this? they are not a computer company. They sell kindles only to get people to buy ebooks from them. And they do that only because they don't want their physical book sales cannibalized by ebook sales from other purveyors.

apple gave wifi to the "first" ipod touch to give buyers the "chance" to buy at the iTunes store.. they improved their hardware in order to boost their iTunes-store sales.. I dunno which explanation you got, but regarding the fact that 'apple' runs a business, I see no other explanation.. you could argue:"why not give wifi to the nano? it could run podcasts e.g."... "good point", "..but it breakes apple's differentiation model" I'd go on..

-over-

Amazon should be keeping in mind that they want to sell digital downloads, and focus on their core competency. To this end they should keep kindles as cheap as possible, bringing the price down to zero if they can. They should make their bookstore the preferred location for every ebook purchaser, either by price, selection, or something else. They should make it so their ebooks can be read on every device out there - they need to make amazon.com more pleasant and desirable than the iBookstore.

Sure... but if the platform is not "up-to-date", even the most in-tech-uninterested-possible-buyer would say:"well the iPad has feature X Y and Z", why should I get a kindle (take e-ink out of the debate for a moment)... Just as apple makes >50% of the users believe they get the best and most cutting edge technology in apple products, people believe that more mpx mean better picture quality..

Don't forget to include marketing in your argument.. they must sell the kindle as a device... sure.. if it cost you close to nothing and you'll get 5 ebooks for free, maybe it well sell, but only initially.. that does not bind the customer to your platform as apple's products do...

Our whole eco-system is based on growth.. if you cannot lower the prices on ebooks substantially (and tell me, how could amazon do that? ebooks are nowhere as popular as mp3 downloads in the "book-sector"), you have to improve the platform. that is what they are doing (or trying to do).. Android could be THE BEST MOBILE OS IN THE WORLD AND EVERYONE KNOWS IT... who cares if you only get a 0.3 mpx cam and no color screen (exaggeration!)....

Instead they are pissing off publishers (Macmillan) and customers (who wanted to buy macmillan, who can't figure out how many devices their ebooks can be on, who can't figure out when amazon may revoke the rights to their books, etc.), and doing things that can only result in the price of the kindles going up (or perhaps staying constant) and making Apple, who will soon probably be the "ebook reader" market share leader, the enemy.

That's certainly a problem. point taken. but it's not like this is an unsolveable problem (is that a legit english word? )

No, I’m saying that I think if Amazon comes up with a slate PC type thing that is in direct competition with the iPad, the HP Slate, and all these new computer tablets; they’d better have something that blows us away. Because anything short of mind-blowing and people will dismiss it – ie. Apple folks will stay with iPad and Windows folks with stay with one of these slate PCs running Windows 7… and I guess Linux guys will choose Android.

I agree

Just making the Kindle touch sensitive… well, that probably won’t get me to buy it. But whatever they do, if it stays pretty much like a Kindle and the pricing goes up… I think that would be very bad.

This won't be all. I dunno what they are up to. But they are not dumb enough to think that touch-control is enough to convince potential customers to buy that thing.. If they woudl have thought that a touch-enabled OS is better than an intuitive UI with buttons, they would have implemented it with LED/OLED and a touchscreen.. it's really not that hard to get that done.

On the other hand, my sister owns a 1st gen Kindle and she LOVES it. I mentioned that I’m planning to get the iPad and told her all about the iBooks, then I told her about all these Slate PCs that are coming out. (She’s older and doesn’t follow all this stuff)
Anyway she said she didn’t care about any other functions. Weight was her biggest issue. She said if any of those devices were an ounce more than her Kindle she wouldn’t ever buy one. Maybe there are more people like her than I realize.

just.. true

 

[cmaier]

As has been pointed out, amazon can't win a feature fight. It needs to stick to just being a lightweight, long battery-life, easy-on-the-eyes, book reader that is as cheap as possible. Adding any features that don't go directly to that is pointless.

apple gave wifi to the "first" ipod touch to give buyers the "chance" to buy at the iTunes store.. they improved their hardware in order to boost their iTunes-store sales.. I dunno which explanation you got, but regarding the fact that 'apple' runs a business, I see no other explanation.. you could argue:"why not give wifi to the nano? it could run podcasts e.g."... "good point", "..but it breakes apple's differentiation model" I'd go on..

-over-



Sure... but if the platform is not "up-to-date", even the most in-tech-uninterested-possible-buyer would say:"well the iPad has feature X Y and Z", why should I get a kindle (take e-ink out of the debate for a moment)... Just as apple makes >50% of the users believe they get the best and most cutting edge technology in apple products, people believe that more mpx mean better picture quality..

Don't forget to include marketing in your argument.. they must sell the kindle as a device... sure.. if it cost you close to nothing and you'll get 5 ebooks for free, maybe it well sell, but only initially.. that does not bind the customer to your platform as apple's products do...

Our whole eco-system is based on growth.. if you cannot lower the prices on ebooks substantially (and tell me, how could amazon do that? ebooks are nowhere as popular as mp3 downloads in the "book-sector"), you have to improve the platform. that is what they are doing (or trying to do).. Android could be THE BEST MOBILE OS IN THE WORLD AND EVERYONE KNOWS IT... who cares if you only get a 0.3 mpx cam and no color screen (exaggeration!)....



That's certainly a problem. point taken. but it's not like this is an unsolveable problem (is that a legit english word? )



I agree



This won't be all. I dunno what they are up to. But they are not dumb enough to think that touch-control is enough to convince potential customers to buy that thing.. If they woudl have thought that a touch-enabled OS is better than an intuitive UI with buttons, they would have implemented it with LED/OLED and a touchscreen.. it's really not that hard to get that done.



just.. true

 

[Jayomat]

As has been pointed out, amazon can't win a feature fight. It needs to stick to just being a lightweight, long battery-life, easy-on-the-eyes, book reader that is as cheap as possible. Adding any features that don't go directly to that is pointless.

agree i gotta go, celebrate this incredible understanding conversation c u 2morrow

 

[Skoal]

This is just sad and pathetic.

WHY? Because they want to upgrade their device? All the Apple freaks cry anytime another company does anything remotely close to tech that Apple uses. WHO says Amazon is trying to develop an iPad like device?

 

[Skoal]

i see. So you pick the biggest possible categorization. By that argument no one has ever invented anything. The guy who built the first computer deserves no credit, since matter had already been invented.

Uhh, that's hardly a fair comparison.