Why the hell would anybody want the screen to always be on, even if infinite power were available? Hope you don't plan on bringing it into any dark rooms.
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.
Apple Spent Years Designing iPhone for 'Normal People'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why the hell would anybody want the screen to always be on, even if infinite power were available? Hope you don't plan on bringing it into any dark rooms.
If you can't take 10 seconds to do a google search, I'm not gonna waste 10 minutes to list them all.
Great question. No. Nothing is original. And ideas are not "property". Ideas are information and human beings grow and learn by imitating (i.e., copying, "stealing") from other human beings. A baby learns to speak by imitating what they hear from others.
Imagine if the first person to design and use the wheel could have patented it and kept others from ever using a wheel without their permission?
The entire concept of IP is ridiculous. It's really nothing more than government-sanctioned monopoly.
I'll buy that...
End of the day it's a Mac forum. Call me narrow minded but we've had this same argument multiple times on macrumors.
We almost need an exclusive 'iOS rumours' site where iPhone/iOS fans can live in peace. I like iOS 7. I will never buy an Android. I don't want my iPhone to magically turn into a Galaxy Note... I like my smaller screen and Apple UI.
Yes I'm living inside my little shell, but it's safe and I like it! Now leave me alone iOS7 haters/Fandroids.
The problem with that is if nothing is original, then there is nothing for anyone to copy. Clearly new ideas are born at times, or there would be no progress at all.
Oh, there are original inventions. But not when they're just visual reproductions of similar physical things.
Another good example is bounceback.
Ever seen what the item list on a slot machine reel does when it comes to the end of its scrolling? Yep, it first goes past the end position, then it bounces back into place!
When we were developing electronic casino slots back in the early '90s, something seemed to be missing. Aha, I said, where's the slot reel bounceback like in the real machines? So we programmed that in. Totally unnecessary, but cooler than coming to an instant stop. Sound familiar?
Sometimes I jokingly think that Apple programmers went on trips to Reno and came back with patent ideas from early work we did on capacitive touchscreen gaming terminals.
Oh I think some people might honestly believe they invented something that no one has or will. Or, perhaps it's just their bosses who think that. In any case, it's almost never true with software.
Sure, for example some versions of the Neonode had little screen arrows pointing which way to swipe to unlock.
But that's just visuals. I have no problem with anyone claiming a very specific and unique graphic design. What I don't agree with, is trying to patent the action itself.
Apple does this a lot. As a long time touch developer, I was appalled to see their attempt to grab a patent on the idea of "rotating a knob" on screen with your fingers. Good golly, anyone developing with touch thinks of that one right away.
Who knows. Maybe Apple's developers and bosses are so isolated from the real world, that they actually believe they solely can invent these ridiculously obvious ideas. It doesn't help that patent examiners did not seem to have much touch experience at first.
Last edited:
not going to count them for you, but have have fun...from phones, to icons, to chargers, to cables, to entire stores:
https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+samsung+copy&client=safari&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=zoM_U7uJHq3KsQTCvIDgAw&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAg&biw=320&bih=460&dpr=2
...get back to us if you still need help. ta.
----------
10 minute video -- where's the slide to unlock? (you know you can share a time-referenced YouTube link, right?)
----------
not really. you see, that's a physical lock on a door, which is very different than a region-specific area of ouch on a multitouch cell phone display. which again is entirely different than a desktop monitor UI on some crappy engineering software.
you misunderstand the nature of the beast. that it was done IRL (in real life) has no bearing on digital innovation. figuring out how to do it on glass and bits is entirely different than IRL, regardless of conceptual similarities.
speaking to someone is easy in IRL. doing so over chips was no minute task.
speaking to someone is easy in IRL. doing so over chips was no minute task.
Oh, there are original inventions. But not when they're just visual reproductions of similar physical things.
Another good example is bounceback.
Ever seen what the item list on a slot machine reel does when it comes to the end of its scrolling? Yep, it first goes past the end position, then it bounces back into place!
YouTube: video
When we were developing electronic casino slots back in the early '90s, something seemed to be missing. Aha, I said, where's the slot reel bounceback like in the real machines? So we programmed that in. Totally unnecessary, but cooler than coming to an instant stop. Sound familiar?
Sometimes I jokingly think that Apple programmers went on trips to Reno and came back with patent ideas from early work we did on capacitive touchscreen gaming terminals.
Oh I think some people might honestly believe they invented something that no one has or will. Or, perhaps it's just their bosses who think that. In any case, it's almost never true with software.
Sure, for example some versions of the Neonode had little screen arrows pointing which way to swipe to unlock.
But that's just visuals. I have no problem with anyone claiming a very specific and unique graphic design. What I don't agree with, is trying to patent the action itself.
Apple does this a lot. As a long time touch developer, I was appalled to see their attempt to grab a patent on the idea of "rotating a knob" on screen with your fingers. Good golly, anyone developing with touch thinks of that one right away.
Who knows. Maybe Apple's developers and bosses are so isolated from the real world, that they actually believe they solely can invent these ridiculously obvious ideas. It doesn't help that patent examiners did not seem to have much touch experience at first.
This is the best summary of the philosophy behind iOS 7 I've heard to this day. This is exactly the point of iOS 7. The previous versions were pretty much just training wheels for multi touch based operating systems.
Well then, if you are as "advanced" as you think you are, then you should have done your maths about the phone and the OS it runs before committing yourself into a long contract. Or even better, you can create your own product! I am sure an electronically "non moronic" person like you is capable of doing it
As for me, I prefer a operating system I don't have to be "trained" to operate properly, thank you very much. That's why I've mostly been using Apple products for the last 8-9 years. To paraphrase Christie: I have lots of better things to do with my life than learn how a computer (or mobile device) might work. And then iOS 7 came along.
If the purpose of slide to unlock is to stop accidental activations then hasn't that function been superseded by Touch ID?
I now unlock my phone by pressing the home button and then leaving my finger on the button for half a second, presto, the phone is unlocked.
The only time slide to unlock must be used now is when the phone is turned on, and I don't remember the last time I had to do that#
I now unlock my phone by pressing the home button and then leaving my finger on the button for half a second, presto, the phone is unlocked.
The only time slide to unlock must be used now is when the phone is turned on, and I don't remember the last time I had to do that#
Apple was always the company(under Jobs) that got UX better than anyone ever did. In fact Steve Jobs invented the term "UX" back in the early 1980s when nobody else was even thinking about it. Now everyone has got the UX-religion including Microsoft(amazingly enough).
The quote was specifically the s5, things it had done to copy ios.. I thought they had changed the icon design after the s2?.. to get a different look... To my mind, the hardware and software isn't anything like ios..
Yes, you stumbled onto the truth -- the "normal" people are the 95% of the population (perhaps I'm being generous and not hyperbolic) that are complete dunderheads when it comes to electronics. Yes, these people actually exist, but they are not necessarily "stupid" as you put it. They are doctors, CPAs, teachers, musicians, lawyers, and such with a high degree of education and respectable IQ's. Just because they have a hard time figuring out what menu a setting is buried or power user key combos doesn't make them idiots.
iOS is what Apple wants it to be. If its too "dumbed down" for you stop kvetching and jailbreak or go to another platform. But just understand that however simplistic it might be for us here, the vast majority of consumers are gadget-adverse. That's why they refer to us as geeks and call us at all hours of the day to fix an issue that usually requires nothing more than a power down and power up.