Apple Files Patent Infringement Suit Over 'Knock-Off' Power Adapters

[whooleytoo]

yes, again, that is what clever branding and marketing are about. fanboys were not born fanboys, their endless loyalty to this (or any other) corporation was created by the corporation's marketing and branding strategies. that is business.

That's only one small part of it. A lot of people are fans/fanboys/customers due to the design, quality and/or features of past and current products; due to inertia (e.g. you can't bring your Mac software with you if you switch to PC; and if you switch you're not likely to be as proficient on PC as you are on Mac).

Sorry, but it's a personal bugbear of mine when people imply success is all due to marketing/branding; that'll only take you so far if you don't have the product/service to back it up.

 

[JAT]

Didn't Osborne beat em?

My aunt used one of those early ones. I would not call them really portable at over 20# and with external battery. People don't like to call the Apple Portable portable at over 15# either, which I can't really argue with. Guess we'd have to agree to a weight limit to decide. But I think a built-in battery should be a prerequisite, maybe a later Osborne had that, I don't know every model.

 

[JAT]

i do not know where you live, but if you live in a capitalist country like US, UK, France etc, your "beliefs" diverge from those of your economy. so-called 'true cost' is not related to the retail price. the price is determined by what people are prepared to pay.

I mostly agree with you about the US model for this thread's discussion, but this is not completely accurate in the real world. That is the business management definition of price, and what they love to put forth for marketing and public news. But as an accountant, I have to say it's not nearly as wild as price = demand. Prices are driven by cost for the first 99% of the way, only after that does some branding and other marketing really get involved in markup. Most products never, ever get to that point. Apple would certainly be an exception.

It was fun* in school going to Financial accounting and Management accounting at the same time and having them teach opposite "rules" about the same transactions.




* some words may be used facetiously in my posts

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

So you are saying all earphones sound the same? That could be the dumbest thing I've heard this week.

Depending on age, people can hear frequencies of approximately 20 to 20khz. Many headphones cover a much smaller range. Many don't cover therange linearly, and thus distort the sound by having some frequencies louder than others. Many don't have good isolation from outside sound or between channels.

The Internet sucks because everyone thinks hey are entitled to opine on matters about which they know nothing.

Similar to the light spectrum, humans can only see a minor portion of it. Audio and smell falls within the same limitations. To make yourself believe that you can hear pristine audio from a device even with lossless encoding such as an iPod or iPhone you are confusing yourself. Let alone believe that you buying $200 USD headphones will sound the same as a $200 speaker system. The proximity plays a key role in the intended sound quality. I never claimed that all headphone are equal, I did however state that after a plateau in sound variances the human ear cannot pick up any more or less from sound even if it is encode beyond what humans can hear.

Unless you are claiming that you can now see the entire light spectrum as well, then you must be some super-human. What next you have a better sense of smell then canines. In that case what the heck are you doing on a forum wasting your time.

Indeed there are many physical limitations and variances from one individual to another however we all some the a range of limitations and to claim anything otherwise is well just pompous.

You are right the internet does suck, you do not have to use it.

 

[Berio]

Sorry, but it's a personal bugbear of mine when people imply success is all due to marketing/branding; that'll only take you so far if you don't have the product/service to back it up.

i agree absolutely, i did not mean to infer this; merely meant to point out that besides offering good product and service, they manage to create desire and hysteria through branding, marketing, theatrical announcements, etc, and that this desire & hysteria, coupled with the products themselves, loosens wallets.

best
B

 

[cmaier]

Similar to the light spectrum, humans can only see a minor portion of it. Audio and smell falls within the same limitations. To make yourself believe that you can hear pristine audio from a device even with lossless encoding such as an iPod or iPhone you are confusing yourself. Let alone believe that you buying $200 USD headphones will sound the same as a $200 speaker system. The proximity plays a key role in the intended sound quality. I never claimed that all headphone are equal, I did however state that after a plateau in sound variances the human ear cannot pick up any more or less from sound even if it is encode beyond what humans can hear.

Unless you are claiming that you can now see the entire light spectrum as well, then you must be some super-human. What next you have a better sense of smell then canines. In that case what the heck are you doing on a forum wasting your time.

Indeed there are many physical limitations and variances from one individual to another however we all some the a range of limitations and to claim anything otherwise is well just pompous.

You are right the internet does suck, you do not have to use it.

First of all, your "unless" paragraph is a strawman argument. I said exactly what humans can hear - 20-20KHz (as I pointed out, it varies based on age and other factors.) 20-20KHz is the "spectrum" to which you refer (but about which you clearly know nothing.) Since I pointed out the variances between people within this range, your "indeed" paragraph makes no sense.

I also pointed out that some headphones produce less than 20-20KHz, some produce non-linear output, and some have poor isolation. If I can hear 20-20KHz, and earphone A produces 20-12KHz and earphone B produces B 20-18KHz, are you really so dense that you think I can't hear the difference? Really? And you think that $20 earphones and $200 earphones produce the same sound within the range of human hearing? Well they don't. Your $20 earphones will produce something like 30-12KHz. Your $200 earphones will produce something like 20-18KHz. Your $20 earphones will bleed the left and right channels together. Your $200 earphones will not. Your $20 earphones will allow outside sounds to bleed into your ear. Your $200 earphones will not. All of this is absolutely detectable by the human ear.

And your arguments about smell are stupid. There is no "smell spectrum."

 

[Berio]

Prices are driven by cost for the first 99% of the way, only after that does some branding and other marketing really get involved in markup. Most products never, ever get to that point.

true, but in the case of luxury goods, perfumes, etc, there is no close correlation between cost & retail. indeed, if a perfume, designer dress etc was priced close to it's actual cost, nobody would buy it, it would no longer be a display of wealth. apple's products i would argue are for many folks luxury items and display of wealth.

apple used to be almost limited to the creative industry, now every richkid gets their parents to buy them a MBP, mainly for their chatting facebook and youtube needs.

few years ago in china nobody knew what an apple computer was, now in shanghai's expensive cafés the kids of the rich all have MBs MBPs, i doubt they're using them for editing video or DTP

It was fun* in school going to Financial accounting and Management accounting at the same time and having them teach opposite "rules" about the same transactions. some words may be used facetiously in my posts

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

yes, again, that is what clever branding and marketing are about. fanboys were not born fanboys, their endless loyalty to this (or any other) corporation was created by the corporation's marketing and branding strategies. that is business. you seem to think someone owes you something, that you have a 'right' to buy things cheaper than they choose to sell them for. why?

personally i agree that their stuff is expensive, often too expensive for me, that however does not make them a 'bad' company.
apple seems to have 2 aims: make modern, desirable hw and sw, and make lots of money.
they seem pretty good at both these tasks




how is this statement related to your points about the cost of their products?

So it all come down to some fabricated cost breakdown. Lets see so when people complained that reduced the price of the initial iPhone months later, what was the point of that. When companies such as AT&T start charging well beyond what the service is actually worth when compared to its competition. Sure no one is forcing you to use it, however some people do not have any other options as there is no service provided by another company. Does that still make it ethical for a single provider to overcharge its customers when compared to another area where competition is available.

Capitalism is what got the financial sector into hot water, seems people never learn.

My statement is related to the point as it shows if one company can produce a product for half the price and another is overcharging for the same product and counting on its consumers ignorance to buy they product by pushing the competition out. This is not choice it is a monopolistic attitude to have in a free Nation and market. Heck why does not adopt a standard HDMI port and instead use a mini-DVI port so they can sell an overpriced adapter. Is one better then the other . Its a cash grab on part. They got stung once in the early and mid 90's when they did not adopt standard hardware, and they learn't by mimicking the industry. Though it seems they are back to they same old mentality.

How hard is it to drop the mini-DVI and replace it with HDMI or use an eSATA instead of a FW400/800. The entire industry uses these ports.

 

[Berio]

Unless you are claiming that you can now see the entire light spectrum as well, then you must be some super-human. What next you have a better sense of smell then canines. In that case what the heck are you doing on a forum wasting your time.

reading the message you are quoting, it seems he didn't claim to hear or see entire spectra, he said something along the lines: "Depending on age, people can hear frequencies of approximately 20 to 20khz. Many headphones cover a much smaller range."

actually that is exactly what he said, thus your post makes no sense.

at least you've stopped mumbling about 'true cost', and how you ought to have a right to purchase stuff at a price you choose.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

First of all, your "unless" paragraph is a strawman argument. I said exactly what humans can hear - 20-20KHz (as I pointed out, it varies based on age and other factors.) 20-20KHz is the "spectrum" to which you refer (but about which you clearly know nothing.) Since I pointed out the variances between people within this range, your "indeed" paragraph makes no sense.

I also pointed out that some headphones produce less than 20-20KHz, some produce non-linear output, and some have poor isolation. If I can hear 20-20KHz, and earphone A produces 20-12KHz and earphone B produces B 20-18KHz, are you really so dense that you think I can't hear the difference? Really? And you think that $20 earphones and $200 earphones produce the same sound within the range of human hearing? Well they don't. Your $20 earphones will produce something like 30-12KHz. Your $200 earphones will produce something like 20-18KHz. Your $20 earphones will bleed the left and right channels together. Your $200 earphones will not. Your $20 earphones will allow outside sounds to bleed into your ear. Your $200 earphones will not. All of this is absolutely detectable by the human ear.

And your arguments about smell are stupid. There is no "smell spectrum."

So if I were to drop a pin across the room, you would hear it at the same frequency compared to if I dropped it right next to your ear when it hits the ground.

It's called being human we compensate for all our senses on a daily basis, nothing is perfect and to claim otherwise is just idiotic in the least. Even when ripping a CD it might not be perfect during the rip, encode, storage or the de-code process. Your headphones are only as good as what you are decoding and to some degree the human ear will compensate for minute variances. It does not care if the sound is constantly flowing at 20Khz or 16KHz. Same with sight, that is the limitation of our thought process. It seems you are over-processing for things that really do not require it. I never claimed a "smell spectrum" I claimed the sensitivity to scent. We have limitations and there is no way to calculate that you are hearing at a constant. This explains why the world is going deaf, too many ppl pluggin they ears and not listening to the world around them.

FYI I work in the audio communications industry for over 10 years, don't bother doing yourself any favours and trying to come across as knowledge.

does not market the iPod and iPhone as an audiophile device, its a general purpose digital music player, that used mainly for mp3, AAC codecs that can hold 1000 songs and sells it to you with marginal earphones. They should just drop the headphones and drop the price for charging for it, I use my own anyhow.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

reading the message you are quoting, it seems he didn't claim to hear or see entire spectra, he said something along the lines: "Depending on age, people can hear frequencies of approximately 20 to 20khz. Many headphones cover a much smaller range."

actually that is exactly what he said, thus your post makes no sense.

at least you've stopped mumbling about 'true cost', and how you ought to have a right to purchase stuff at a price you choose.

If you are trying to listen to Mozart on any pair of headphones or plug you are doing the music an injustice. It was meant to be heard in an amphitheatre, chances are you do not have one if the music in on your iPod or iPhone and trying to listen to it on headphones or earphones will not even reproduce it to its intended sound. However we are humans and compensate for the loss or gain and move on with our day. Harping over it is nonsensical. As long as it sounds decent to you, move along.

 

[Berio]

i spoke too soon, you're back to the cost issue.

So it all come down to some fabricated cost breakdown.

where is this 'fabricated breakdown'? please send me a link

Lets see so when people complained that reduced the price of the initial iPhone months later, what was the point of that.

what was the point of complaining? i don't know. as i earlier paraphrased adam smith, the price is determined by what people will pay for it, therefor it makes sense for apple - as a company aiming to make a profit - to introduce a device at a high price, let the richest and most devoted buy it at that price, then when demand drops, lower the price and get more people to buy it. make less profit/device, but sell more devices. which part do you not understand?

When companies such as AT&T start charging well beyond what the service is actually worth when compared to its competition.

this sentence makes no sense to me, sorry. syntax error

Sure no one is forcing you to use it, however some people do not have any other options as there is no service provided by another company.

just because there is no competition nobody is forced to pay for something. just because my local cinema is screening only one movie tonight does not force me to pay and see it. the iphone is not like a heart transplant, you won't die if you decide against it.
i cannot comment on att and your providers in general, seems you have infrastructure issues in the US which are different from european situation.

Does that still make it ethical for a single provider to overcharge its customers when compared to another area where competition is available.

Ethics? if you want a more ethical situation, maybe you should think about political alternatives to today's economic models. As it is in today's USA, most of Europe, Asia etc ethics do not play a big part. maybe you'd like to see a law passed, forbidding individuals and corporations from earning money beyond a certain limit? careful, your fellow americans will brand you socialist pretty fast

Capitalism is what got the financial sector into hot water, seems people never learn.

yes and no, capitalism is not so clearly defined, there are many shades. 'capitalism relieved of all controlling measures' played its part in the present crisis.
and you are right, people never learn. nature of the human beast. tragic, but also keeps life on this planet interesting

My statement is related to the point as it shows if one company can produce a product for half the price and another is overcharging for the same product and counting on its consumers ignorance to buy they product by pushing the competition out. This is not choice it is a monopolistic attitude to have in a free Nation and market.

seems you're arguing for price caps, true cost relationships, etc. if that is what you want, see above: maybe you should think about political alternatives. bit of a marxist in you, eh?

your thoughts on one company versus another: don't forget who paid for all the R&D, the wages of scientists involved etc. compared to another company who take a mold, scrape off the apple loge and place an order at a factory in china

Heck why does not adopt a standard HDMI port and instead use a mini-DVI port so they can sell an overpriced adapter.

i don't know, perhaps because a smaller port is more appropriate for a laptop, and also so that "they can sell an overpriced adapter". this is what they do to, it increases profit.

Its a cash grab on apple part.

yawn.... any more complaints about the economic system you live in? no one is forcing to you to buy their products, no one is forcing you to live where you live, if you feel oppressed, pack your things and leave, become an exile and fight from abroad. i fled an oppresive regime 30 years ago. never looked back

 

[Berio]

Mozart on headphones

If you are trying to listen to Mozart on any pair of headphones or plug you are doing the music an injustice. It was meant to be heard in an amphitheatre, chances are you do not have one if the music in on your iPod or iPhone and trying to listen to it on headphones or earphones will not even reproduce it to its intended sound. However we are humans and compensate for the loss or gain and move on with our day. Harping over it is nonsensical. As long as it sounds decent to you, move along.

The author of these words alleges he's worked in the audio communication industry for 10 years. No further comment.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

The author of these words alleges he's worked in the audio communication industry for 10 years. No further comment.

So you claim that humans do not compensate for the five sense. Hmmm... interesting, seems everything in reality must bother you as it needs to conform to some ideology of your liking. Must really be a depressing world for you.

 

[Berio]

So you claim that humans do not compensate for the five sense.

That's an astounding conclusion.
i didn't once mention compensation and whether i believe in it
maybe you just don't really understand... anything?

Hmmm... interesting, seems everything in reality must bother you as it needs to conform to some ideology of your liking. Must really be a depressing world for you.

another amazing diagnosis. i think a quick scan over your previous mails will show that you are whining and complaining about apple and money and earphones. or are there 2 people posting here under the v name ?

i was surprised by your thoughts on mozart & amphitheatres & "mozart's intended sound" - pretty remarkable thoughts for somebody who claims to understand anything about audio recording, or as you put it "audio communications". which means? .... you work at radio station ... ? doing what...?

don't bother answering, i'm off, your posts are nonsensical
best
B.

 

[Aleco]

Well that's a bitch move.

I don't know what some people here are getting steamed about. As far as I'm concerned, Apple is doing it's customers a favor by patenting the Magsafe and making sure other companies don't make knock offs. I, for one, don't want any 3rd party knock off Magsafe connected to my Macbook Pro. When it comes to my equipment, I'm just not a cheapskate and I don't want any power adaptors damaging my Mac. If something happens with Apple's Magsafe, what happens? We go to Apple. If something happens with the 3rd party Magsafe and it screws up my Mac what happens? Most likely the 3rd party won't help you and Apple won't cover it.

WTF? Then don't get the adapter from an "UNKNOWN" site. You act like there is no such thing as Google, do a simple search of the company name and see if their legit. I'm sure people who shed around $2,000 for a Apple Computer a year isn't stupid enough to go on another site and purchase an adapter, unless it's legit. If you're really THAT worried, then just go to the freaking Apple Store. Might I also add, you might want to learn how to spell "adaptors."

I'm sure your smart enough to go to, NewEgg.com, BestBuy.com, TigerDirect.com, PowerMax.com, and Macsales.com instead of cheapappleacadpaters.com

 

[John.B]

You've obviously never used NeXTStep or Openstep, let alone betas of both that had countless numbers of features both Apple and Microsoft stole from NeXT.

NeXT thrived under Jobs, Apple bought NeXT and got Jobs back into the fold in the bargain. Thankfully, NeXT became the basis for OS X. Arguably the smartest thing Apple (as a corporation) has ever done.

If you look into the OS X Cocoa APIs, that NS prefix you see everywhere (NSArray, etc.) stands for NeXTStep.

 

[seedster2]

You're right. Gotta protect em all!

If they let people get away with infringement then the patent is worthless. I fully understand what they are doing (just as I understand Nokia's position with their patents and Apple).

Agreed. It's Apple's obligation to protect their patent. Otherwise others will follow suit and have leverage in courts.

Ironically, all the usual suspects understand this when apple is not the party being sued. When Nokia does it, you hear ridiculous excuses about Nokia's "real" intentions

 

[Berio]

Might I also add, you might want to learn how to spell "adaptors."

for many people here, english is not the first language, attacking spelling does not underline your point, just makes you look petty.

in an attempt to appear as smug as you do, allow me to point out that you've got the spelling of "their/they're" wrong,

in addition, i think you'll find that you've got "your/you're" wrong too.

and: when you refer to "people" you ought to follow with "aren't" not "isn't"

glasshouses and all that.

best
B

 

[John.B]

Patents are dumb, then.

Seriously, no 3rd-party adapters? What's next, no 3rd-party keyboards or mouses allowed for macs?

For the record, although Apple didn't invent USB they were the first to go all-USB by eliminating all of the other various serial/parallel/PS-2 type connectors for low speed peripherals (keyboards, mice, even printers). Apple actually did the exact opposite of what you are accusing them of plotting.

Really? It's a power adapter for God's sake...

Stop for a minute and revisit the actual power adapter in question.

MagSafe issues aside...

The Apple power adapter has a common transformer unit with a modular plug-in system to take variations of all the world's power plugs using the same transformer. So one transformer works almost anywhere in the world provided you use a modular power plug compatible with the power sockets where you live. The US-specific version has fold-down prongs. There is also a longer power cord with the same modular plug for the transformer. That's what comes with your MacBook/MBP/MBA, and that whole system is what was patented and what was copied without being licensed.

This vendor could've easily created another system that would work as well (or even better, possibly with better strain relief) that wasn't a direct copy of Apple's design. But that wouldn't be compatible with the Apple World Travel Adapter Kit and it wouldn't look like what they got in the box when they got their Mac. Clearly they ripped off the actual Apple design, hoping people wouldn't notice it wasn't an Apple manufactured unit.

 

[AidenShaw]

NeXT thrived under Jobs, Apple bought NeXT and got Jobs back into the fold in the bargain.

I don't think many people used the word "thrive" to describe NeXT.

NeXT withdrew from the hardware business in 1993 and the company was renamed NeXT Software Inc; subsequently 300 of the 540 staff employees were laid off....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT#1993.E2.80.931996:_NeXT_Software​

 

[cmaier]

I don't think many people used the word "thrive" to describe NeXT.

NeXT withdrew from the hardware business in 1993 and the company was renamed NeXT Software Inc; subsequently 300 of the 540 staff employees were laid off....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT#1993.E2.80.931996:_NeXT_Software​

yeah. Neat hardware. Neat software. Business failure.

 

[John.B]

I don't think many people used the word "thrive" to describe NeXT.

You have prefered some sort of a System 10 vs. OS X?

 

[bobertoq]

Oh I see. The companies should do the r&d without any possibility of recouping the expenses. Makes sense. Oh, wait - then they'd run out of money and not have any left to pay the scientists working on those cures. But I'm sure the scientists will work for free. And the scientists' landlords won't ask for rent, and neighborhood restaurants will feed them for free so they can work on those cures. And the restaurants' suppliers will give them free meat and produce, and the chefs will work for free, all so that the pharmaceutical companies can find those cures and not have to patent them in order to recoup a massive r&d expense.

Because that's how it works in Sweden, where there are so many inventions.

Not a fan of socialized medicine, huh?

 

[Berio]

Not a fan of socialized medicine, huh?

personally i am a fan of european health services, lived in germany for 20 years, great system.

however medicine and luxury appliances (like apple's) are not related.

as human's i do believe we should all be responsible for caring for each other's basic health needs, (and housing, education, etc) but i don't believe we have a responsibility to to make luxury computers and mp3 players available for each other. great innovation is often driven by egos and greed, and a strong climate of competition. as are the arts and athletics.

i do not see a "socialized computer industry" bringing us many delights, especially in today's world. east germany's "robotron" computer springs to mind, (waiting time:4 years).