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.
Cisco And Apple Reach iPhone Trademark Agreement
- Thread starter Unspeaked
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
... and ...
Stella said:
Oh, right, just like Apple didn't start the whole "translucent plastics" thing; you know, that fad that just happened to coincidentally start right after the original iMac came out, where you started finding computer peripherals have colored translucent plastics, and even office supplies like staplers and chairs followed suit. Yup, Apple was just jumping on the bandwagon there!
The thing that gets me, and that everyone seems to let slide these days, is when people dismiss the amount of influence that Apple has on the market. If I had a say in Apple, I would trademark the term "bandwagon" and then sue everyone who accuses Apple for jumping on it, because apparently some people don't know what it means.
Answer: They didn't. Its all in your head.
Please remove your fan boy attitude right now - if you have one.
If you do not - please accept my apologies for inferring such a thought.
NO THEY DIDN'T START THE I<EVERYTHING>.. LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE ITS OUT THERE!!
Apple wasn't first, it's just coincidence that more than one company came up with the idea of using an "i" (out of all the 26 things they could have chosen).
Obviously there was no "bandwagon" to jump on. Apple didn't ride the iPhone's massive publicity in naming the iMac
Apple DID have to explain the "i" because next to nobody had heard of it, and nobody was using it in exactly the way Apple was. (Their explanation being rather vague--it could be "I" or "Internet".) Explaining a new name just makes sense. And yes, Cisco's claim on the name was legitimate--they bought the company that used the iPhone name long ago.
You really think Apple was riding on some existing brand awareness that "i" prefixes had?
There's such a thing as trying too hard to find "fanboys"
(An interesting note: Apple's product was named iPhone in the media long before it was officially called so by Apple.)
Obviously there was no "bandwagon" to jump on. Apple didn't ride the iPhone's massive publicity in naming the iMac
Apple DID have to explain the "i" because next to nobody had heard of it, and nobody was using it in exactly the way Apple was. (Their explanation being rather vague--it could be "I" or "Internet".) Explaining a new name just makes sense. And yes, Cisco's claim on the name was legitimate--they bought the company that used the iPhone name long ago.
You really think Apple was riding on some existing brand awareness that "i" prefixes had?
There's such a thing as trying too hard to find "fanboys"
(An interesting note: Apple's product was named iPhone in the media long before it was officially called so by Apple.)
Infogear had the iPhone registration since 1996.
So, one, example for starters!
http://blogs.cisco.com/news/2007/01/...ne_tradem.html
So, no, not a stretch at all.
I stand corrected, well played.
I knew what the 'I' stood for, but then I don't count for the entire population. Back then I would not have even considered of buying a Mac.
Personally, I think people are getting carried away with apple 'invented' everything notion. Too many fan boi attitudes.
Personally, I think people are getting carried away with apple 'invented' everything notion. Too many fan boi attitudes.
I'm sorry, but I just have to ask: If you're not a "fan boi" why are you on this forum?
What do you mean, you knew? It could stand for anything any company wants to make it stand for. You can't know what the company means until the company tells you
A chance to drop clever (?) insults like "fan boi"?
Apple almost certainly DID invent the "i" thing in the iMac's name. The company Cisco now owns ALSO invented the "i" thing. Two companies naming two products both used the same letter--not really that big a coincidence.
Do you think Apple intentionally copied the iPhone name when they named the iMac, rather than coming up with it independently? An interesting theory, but if you're sure it's the correct theory without evidence, that could seem a little "carried away"
I'm not sure what naming adds or subtracts from Apple's undisputed history of tech innovation, though.
Who cares !!
Both sides win.Especially Apple because the Linksys iPhone is destined to the scrap heap with all eyes on the real iPhone.
I just can't see how the two will use the same name and have both survive.
Collaboration ?.This means Skype comes to the iPhone rev.b
Both sides win.Especially Apple because the Linksys iPhone is destined to the scrap heap with all eyes on the real iPhone.
I just can't see how the two will use the same name and have both survive.
Collaboration ?.This means Skype comes to the iPhone rev.b
News flash: this forums is just not for "Fan Boi's"
Why cannot we have an open mind, instead of giving high five's of everything that Apple does ( paraphrases a good comment from someone else recently )?
I've already given evidence that Apple did NOT evident i<everything>, what more evidence do you need?
Apple came up with iMac - so what? The i prefix was hardly original at the time.
What do you mean, you knew? It could stand for anything any company wants to make it stand for. You can't know what the company means until the company tells you
A chance to drop clever (?) insults like "fan boi"?
Apple DID in fact invent the "i" thing in the iMac's name. The company Cisco now owns ALSO invented the "i" thing.
Do you think Apple copied the iPhone name when they named the iMac, rather than coming up with it independently? An interesting theory, but if you're sure of that without evidence, that could seem a little "carried away"
Really? This site is about Apple/Mac rumors.... RUMORS who else but fan boi's care about what Apple might be doing?
You pinned me, though... I am a die hard Apple fan BOY. Been using Macs since 86 on System 6.X. I've taken a lot of flak just for using and loving a different OS, and I believe I'm a better person for it. Belittle me if you must, low self esteem manifests itself that way most often.
Apple lost BIG time
I don't think anyone read the fine print saying that there will be some "...interoperability in the areas of security, and consumer and enterprise communications".
Apple is used to closed systems, like iPods and iTunes... where no one music player works with iTunes aside from iPods. That is a key factor to their success. I think this will force apple's iPhone to open up and have some unforeseen connection with cicso's stuff. Which may not necessarily be good.
We will have to see, but I think we don't know everything about the agreement that's for sure.
I don't think anyone read the fine print saying that there will be some "...interoperability in the areas of security, and consumer and enterprise communications".
Apple is used to closed systems, like iPods and iTunes... where no one music player works with iTunes aside from iPods. That is a key factor to their success. I think this will force apple's iPhone to open up and have some unforeseen connection with cicso's stuff. Which may not necessarily be good.
We will have to see, but I think we don't know everything about the agreement that's for sure.
Finally
Apple may not have owned the trademark, but no matter who owned it the name would scream Apple, especially after the SteveNote. This way both parties are happy. I didn't like the sound of iPhone anyway.
Apple may not have owned the trademark, but no matter who owned it the name would scream Apple, especially after the SteveNote. This way both parties are happy. I didn't like the sound of iPhone anyway.
Well said. People who are really quick to praise an Apple product/decision/anything, without thinking first, come off as emotionally-driven and probably enjoying their Apple products too much.
Ditto for being really quick to put down things from Apple. That too comes off as emotionally-driven.
I'd rather be open minded than believe that Apple or any other company can do no wrong.
If you have that attitude about these forums, then you are very wrong. Discussion groups are just that - to debate - not to worship Apple at every turn.
If you have that attitude about these forums, then you are very wrong. Discussion groups are just that - to debate - not to worship Apple at every turn.
Wow, I can't believe how much publicity the Cisco iPhone has had from this. it's almost in their interests to drag it out as long as possible.
http://bla.st/iphone/
http://bla.st/iphone/
Must you come into every thread on the iPhone and make snide comments and basically ruin the thread. It's been only 1 page and you're already dropping the "fan boi" comment.
You sound like a glass is half full type of person. Personally it sounds as if Steve caved. Who does this agreement benefit more? Apple or Cisco? The iphone is going to be sold in the US well before anywhere else. Without that trademark Apple would have to rename everything, everything in the OS, iTunes, website, etc. Its more of a PITA for Apple then anything else. Alternatively Cisco now gets to piggyback their hardware on Apple's success.
Yah I think Apple knew they were up crap creek, at least in the US. As has been stated before the company Cisco bought has had the name for years. Well before the iPod, and you sure as heck can't trademark putting an i infront of a product's name. That has been done for years as well *Holds up his iPaq 3630 circa 2000*
Are you seriously saying you don't know the difference between a fan and a fan boi?
I'm a huge Apple fan, and I care about what they're doing and what they might be doing, but I also can recognize that they're not perfect, they're not always right, in fact sometimes they can be downright bullies.
So TIM. Are you going to every forum on the net posting the same thing?
http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/21/apple-and-cisco-settle/#comments
Rhymes suspiciously with the 1998 iMac
(Which, unlike the 1996 iPhone, had huge brand awareness and media attention worth playing off of.)
"Interoperability" is a pretty low bar. An agreement to "explore" interoperability is absurdly low...Apple really gave up next to nothing.
Do the fan boi's have to come out and suggest that Apple can do no wrong and invented everything? Even suggesting that they invented the i<everything>?
People should do their research before posting inaccurate information.
OK, I may over do the Fan Boi phrase - granted.
I completely agree, debate to your hearts content. Why resort to name calling? I conceded to your evidence.
Just to be clear, I do not worship Apple, and do admit they have failed. As I said I take a lot of S*** over just using Apple products. Everyone knows they're not perfect, just as Microsoft isn't.
OK, Stella, how about a truce? I don't come here to start fights.