Ban on Sale of Samsung Galaxy Smartphones in EU Set for October 13th

[Mattie Num Nums]

You spend the time and money it takes to invent a different way of doing things.
After you spend all your time and money on that and release your product make sure to share all your ideas with others in the business so they can be successful, too, without having to invest the time and money you did.

This touch screen phone phenomenon is not the end of the road in mobile computing. Something better will come along. It always does.

Thats what makes fighting over it useless. Apple is making billions on it and so are the others. Apple isn't going to take any business away from Android by doing this. By the time this is all said and done the iPhone will be old and the Galaxy will be old.

 

[Oletros]

I hate to tell you, but before the iPhone in 2007... swiping to go through photos did not exist. I was there and I saw the keyboard. Is it obvious now? Sure. But back then it was a totally new way to do these things.

You're wrong, HTC presented their TouchFLO interface with swipe before the iPhone was presented

 

[*LTD*]

Samsung spends an hour changing its Photo App and OTA's it and they are done

We're waiting. Better call them to get on that asap.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

We're waiting. Better call them to get on that asap.

You act like this is a mindless company ran by Zombies. Samsung has been in business for decades longer than Apple. I'm pretty certain someone here posted that Samsung has already stated they have a patch coming.

 

[BowTheMan89]

I hate to tell you, but before the iPhone in 2007... swiping to go through photos did not exist. I was there and I saw the keyboard. Is it obvious now? Sure. But back then it was a totally new way to do these things.

In the year 2000, every phone had a non-color screen and shared a 12key number pad with a green phone button to call/answer and a red phone button to hang up/cancel.

The fact is the market is dominated by touchscreen phones now, physical buttons are no longer an option to dictate commands to your phone, "swipes"/Taps and other gestures were the logical next control scheme, Apple was just the first to make it popular.

Placing a pattent on a movement should be illegal

 

[MRU]

Is it a co-incidence the ban goes into place the day before the rumored/hinted launch date of the iPhone 5 ?

If it is a co-incidence; taking out the competition the day before you launch your new flagship phone is indeed scarily uncanny timing....

 

[Dbrown]

LTD's head is prolly about to explode... take a deep breath lol!!!

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

We're waiting. Better call them to get on that asap.

BTW: when are you going to respond to the people who are asking you your opinions on Apple losing a patent while all Samsung needs to do is a simple OTA software patch.

In the year 2000, every phone had a non-color screen and shared a 12key number pad with a green phone button to call/answer and a red phone button to hang up/cancel.

The fact is the market is dominated by touchscreen phones now, physical buttons are no longer an option to dictate commands to your phone, "swipes"/Taps and other gestures were the logical next control scheme, Apple was just the first to make it popular.

Placing a pattent on a movement should be illegal

In the year 2001 though, I had a Sanyo flip phone with a web browser, camera, and a color display. Still 6 years before the iPhone. That same year I had a Sony Clie that played MP3's.

 

[divinox]

I am well aware that software is not hardware. It is not Google making the hardware. I get that. (actually... we do have Google-rolla now)

Do you, really?

There are different ways to navigate a touch device and still give your product it's own UI and it's own look. Windows Phone 7 perhaps?

(i) Yes, WP7 sports an - as far as computing is concerned - innovative GUI. However, iOS does not. Icons in a grid. Come on? Where is the innovation in that?

(ii) A product you still swipe to navigate. I asked you to think of a different (sensible) way to utilize touch to navigate a device, not provide me with an example of exactly the same. Do you have an answer or not?

 

[macsmurf]

"Because if you allow obvious patents it will be very difficult to invent anything new."

I can't go with you there, at all. If it was so obvious, why was Apple the first company to pour buckets of money into R&D to bring it to market? I suspect that it's only "obvious" to some now, because it works so well.

The point was that if you allow obvious patents then you completely kill innovation because it simply wouldn't be profitable to invent something new.

Should you be allowed to patent thumbnails? That is, downscaling pictures in order to fit more on the screen or work around bandwith limitations? If so, any photo management software would probably have to license that "invention". How about "clicking", "double-clicking", "drag&drop", and "right clicking"? Someone invented that, right? So they should be reimbursed.

 

[rickdollar]

Thats what makes fighting over it useless. Apple is making billions on it and so are the others. Apple isn't going to take any business away from Android by doing this. By the time this is all said and done the iPhone will be old and the Galaxy will be old.

Apple is a business in a capitalist society. The main goal is to make the most profit it can. You don't do that by sharing the wealth.

 

[BowTheMan89]

Do you, really?



(i) Yes, WP7 sports an - as far as computing is concerned - innovative GUI. However, iOS does not. Icons in a grid. Come on? Where is the innovation in that?

(ii) A product you still swipe to navigate. I asked you to think of a different (sensible) way to utilize touch to navigate a device, not provide me with an example of exactly the same. Do you have an answer or not?

WP7 phone use swipe gesures to scroll through photos and other things as well...better watch out!

 

[*LTD*]

BTW: when are you going to respond to the people who are asking you your opinions on Apple losing a patent while all Samsung needs to do is a simple OTA software patch.

I'm not. When (and if) Samsung releases this patch and fulfills their legal obligations to the courts' satisfaction, then I'll happily respond.

 

[jkichline]

Why not?

The problem is the whole patents system. They grant patents on trivial things. This is the root of the problem.

They basically have a patent on natural moves (i.e. that's how you turn pages with a physical book) that should not have been granted in the first place.

This is as stupid as patenting that when I move my mouse left, the cursor on my screen goes to the left.

Imagine having to know that when I'm on an Apple device, moving the mouse to the left moves the cursor to the left, but on Windows moving the mouse to the left moves the cursor to the top, etc. That is what's going to happen with all those patent wars. Different interfaces depending on which company made it. It's insane.

But right now, like it or not, there is a patent system. So if I were Apple, I'd patent all the "touch" moves so that nobody else can lock them away and then give free licenses to anyone who asks. No fees or minimum requirements, as long as you make the standard moves work in the way people would expect them to work.

That's how standards are made.

Why shouldn't this have been patented? Before the iPhone, there was no such thing as these touch-based gestures. It's easy for us, 4 years later to say "that's obvious", but back then it wasn't, and Apple did it first and they did it right. They put years of research and invested millions of dollars into this and deserve to reap the benefits of that.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

Apple is a business in a capitalist society. The main goal is to make the most profit it can. You don't do that by sharing the wealth.

Who said anything about sharing the wealth. Bottom line is Apple could cross license and make money regardless. Some people just will refuse to buy Apple products, buy Android, and Apple will still make cash off cross licensing. Its a win win but its not what Steve wants. He wants total domination in everything he does regardless. I understand what you are saying though.

I'm not. When (and if) Samsung releases this patch and fulfills their legal obligations to the courts' satisfaction, then I'll happily respond.

Why? Apple won't magically get its patent back. Its lost forever. You're a smart guy you know damn well this is an easy fix for Samsung.

 

[macsmurf]

Why shouldn't this have been patented? Before the iPhone, there was no such thing as these touch-based gestures. It's easy for us, 4 years later to say "that's obvious", but back then it wasn't, and Apple did it first and they did it right. They put years of research and invested millions of dollars into this and deserve to reap the benefits of that.

Palm used stylus based gestures. That should be patented, right? After all, Palm probably put years of research and invested millions of dollars into this and deserve to reap the benefits of that.

 

[peterdevries]

Get over this whole "but they did patent it". No, they probably didnt patent that, nor did they patent the wheel. You see, most of us dont think that the obvious should be patentable.

You don't see the point do you? In business it's not about being fair or not. It's about maximizing shareholder value. Patents secure income from the the stuff that companies patent (note that I'm not using "invent" here).

In other words:
By patenting you make sure that another company cannot profit from the technology you patented, which means that if this is a technology that customers like, they will not find it anywhere. This will secure market share and hence profits.

We can all pretend like fairness is nice and should matter in business, but it doesn't. So whether you, I or most of us think it shouldn't be patentable doesn't matter.

I do agree with you that it shouldn't be patentable, but unfortunately it can be, and as long as this is the situation I'm glad that Apple defends the patents they haven because it makes sure that my Apple share price goes up.

 

[314631]

We're winning! WINNING! WINNING! WINNING! Sorry Fandroids but this is war.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

We're winning! WINNING! WINNING! WINNING! Sorry Fandroids but this is war.

Photo App Redesign > Lost Patent

I'm sorry but Apple may have lost in this one.

 

[ct2k7]

We're winning! WINNING! WINNING! WINNING! Sorry Fandroids but this is war.

Meanwhile.... Apple loses a patent

I'm an Apple shareholder too.

 

[ChazUK]

We're winning! WINNING! WINNING! WINNING! Sorry Fandroids but this is war.

You should be reading! READING! READING! READING! what has in fact just happened.

 

[macsmurf]

Imagine the internet when hyperlinks, drop-down menus, check boxes, radio buttons, text boxes, and selectable items in a list were patented. Every web page would have to figure out a different way to navigate or to pay the license fees. HTML would cost money to use, not to mention TCP/IP and packet switching networks in general.

 

[Oletros]

Why shouldn't this have been patented? Before the iPhone, there was no such thing as these touch-based gestures. It's easy for us, 4 years later to say "that's obvious", but back then it wasn't, and Apple did it first and they did it right. They put years of research and invested millions of dollars into this and deserve to reap the benefits of that.

Wrong, TouchFLO was presented before the iPhone and it had swipe gestures

 

[*LTD*]

Why? Apple won't magically get its patent back. Its lost forever. You're a smart guy you know damn well this is an easy fix for Samsung.

That's fine.

I'm actually betting Samsung won't make the change.

Making the change admits that they were in the wrong and are buckling to Apple, which casts even more aspersions on them (on top of what there is already.)

Not making the change will simply witness the execution of the ban and Samsung also loses. They have the option of bringing other suits against Apple instead, with a request for an injunction against Apple products (which might very well leave Samsung in just as disadvantageous of a position as they are now, for they've already tried to fight Apple.)

Apple has absolutely nothing to lose in all this. Lord only knows what new argument they'll bring to the table. Just how deep do Apple's patents go?

So, Samsung on the one hand, loses more face, if they make the change. On the other hand (of they don't make the change) they lose more money and share (and possibly face.)

But for now this is all speculation.

 

[teege]

In the year 2000, every phone had a non-color screen and shared a 12key number pad with a green phone button to call/answer and a red phone button to hang up/cancel.

The fact is the market is dominated by touchscreen phones now, physical buttons are no longer an option to dictate commands to your phone, "swipes"/Taps and other gestures were the logical next control scheme, Apple was just the first to make it popular.

Placing a pattent on a movement should be illegal

Not quite. Taps seem to be a logical step as far as I'm concerned. Swiping is a big step. Considering scrolling through pictures previously involved clicking arrows, or tapping an arrow on a keyboard, it seems that touching some sort of arrow would be logical. How do you get the jump to swiping? There were touch devices before Apple came out with the iPhone. None of them had swiping movements like Apple's. The reason? It's not obvious.

Also, the patent isn't on a movement per se. It's on the machine end (i.e. the product and the method to perform the actions by the operating system).