Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
You can't possibly think Apple holds a key smartphone patent? Once which covers all smartphones? Maybe they have a main patent, but nothing that will screw everyone.

Actually this is a big deal.

Manufacturers don't own Android OS(which is under GPL). Now that Apple officially owns this UI patent, it would be much easier(and in their favor) to enforce what they believe to be infringement.

This will even effect companies that customize Android. Apple can probably go after Amazon for the kindle if they wanted to based on how they customized Android.

Nobody else has anywhere near the type of UI patent Apple holds now. If they do, it's for a likeness that predates mainstream of touchscreen UIs.
 
With massive power and success comes paranoia. The bigger they come, the harder they fall. Maybe this is why Apple is so patent happy lately. They weren't always like this. The more you have to lose, the tighter you squeeze.

They've probably quintupled their legal department in the last decade. All those lawyers need to justify their jobs. Half of them probably spend their days pouring over old technical drawings and write ups, looking for patent crumbs. The other half probably spends all their time looking for loopholes and expired patents in patent offices worldwide.

I can't help but wonder if Apple is running out of ideas for the iPhone. If Siri is any indication, they may have spied the bottom of the well. I mean, how many features does a phone really need? Sure, they can keep bumping specs. But a quad core chip and a 4K camera are not new features, they're just upgrades.

So what do you do if you see your idea field drying up sooner than later? You start rationing your current ideas (incremental releases like the 3G>3GS and the 4>4S speak to this), and you start concentrating on monetizing your current ideas by carpet bombing the patent office.

Apple is starting to act like an aging rock star. Too fried to come up with a great new album. Too tired to tour. Instead, they start suing people for using their songs, or copying a guitar riff. And they come off as a bit sad and desperate.

As the famous line goes, if you can't innovate, litigate.
 
Actually this is a big deal.

Manufacturers don't own Android OS(which is under GPL). Now that Apple officially owns this UI patent, it would be much easier(and in their favor) to enforce what they believe to be infringement.

This will even effect companies that customize Android. Apple can probably go after Amazon for the kindle if they wanted to based on how they customized Android.

Nobody else has anywhere near the type of UI patent Apple holds now. If they do, it's for a likeness that predates mainstream of touchscreen UIs.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Nokia themselves have several UI patents that can royally screw Apple. Canon (yes, Canon, the camera guys) also have patents that can screw Apple in the UI sense. Palm's technology in HP has UI patents that can f* ***** up for Apple.

I remember a UI patent under Palm regarding multitasking under a phone call. Surprisingly, the patent has pictures of an UI which is strikingly similar to the one current used by Apple in the phone app. However, this patent is licensed. Gizmodo did an article on it. Go on and read...
 
Apple; World's Largest Patent Trolls.

Really, makes me want android even more honestly...This is getting out of hand Apple.
 
As the famous line goes, if you can't innovate, litigate.

Steve Jobs made it clear at the first Apple keynote that Apple was not going to tolerate IP infringement.

Blame Bill Gates if anyone. Apple was never going to allow that situation to happen again without a fight.
 
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Nokia themselves have several UI patents that can royally screw Apple. Canon (yes, Canon, the camera guys) also have patents that can screw Apple in the UI sense. Palm's technology in HP has UI patents that can f* ***** up for Apple.

I remember a UI patent under Palm regarding multitasking under a phone call. Surprisingly, the patent has pictures of an UI which is strikingly similar to the one current used by Apple in the phone app. However, this patent is licensed. Gizmodo did an article on it. Go on and read...

Since I don't know what I'm talking about ..... :cool:

Can you provide sources for your claims?

Cause if what you claim is true, then why haven't they went after Apple yet? Others have went after Apple like Creative and won. This is why I doubt your claims unless you provide sources.

Everyone is acting like Apple is the only one playing the patent game. When fact is any other company in Apple's position would do the exact same thing.
 
Exactly.

Why purchase an android phone that is going to get stripped of its features because it stole them from Apple?

Go with the iPhone and you don't have to worry about any of the nonsense that you do with Android :)

The S3 is a better phone than iPhone. And I have an iPhone. Android has caught up to iOS, Apple knows it, and Android is willing to take its OS to places Apple tells you you don't need it to go. I was once all for Apple but now it's kind of sickening to see people blindly agree with whatever Apple does.

It's very sickening, actually. Apple knows Android is catching up fast.
 
Steve Jobs made it clear at the first Apple keynote that Apple was not going to tolerate IP infringement.

Blame Bill Gates if anyone. Apple was never going to allow that situation to happen again without a fight.

Bill Gates wouldn't have had anything to steal from Apple if Apple hadn't stolen anything from Xerox PARC. Jobs was notorious for taking other people's ideas and calling them his own, and Apple's been doing the same all along.

But lately, they seem to be in the headlines less for having great products and more for having great lawyers. To my thinking, it's a sign of a slowly setting sun.

And I don't understand why Apple should give a crap about Android. It's never going to be an exact replica of iOS. And since Apple will never license iOS, they will never have the market saturation of Android. Most people don't choose Android because of the software. They choose it because it comes on a cheap or even free phone. So what if the success of the iPhone inspired a successful touch screen based OS?...big deal. Apple needs to get over it and move on.

McDonald's doesn't sue Burger King every 5 minutes, but they sell identical food, and McDonald's was first. There are no hamburger wars. Each company just concentrates on their own customer base. Each company spends their energy trying to win customers from the other, not trying litigate them into oblivion. Apple needs to take a page from their books.
 
Bill Gates wouldn't have had anything to steal from Apple if Apple hadn't stolen anything from Xerox PARC. Jobs was notorious for taking other people's ideas and calling them his own, and Apple's been doing the same all along.

But lately, they seem to be in the headlines less for having great products and more for having great lawyers. To my thinking, it's a sign of a slowly setting sun.

And I don't understand why Apple should give a crap about Android. It's never going to be an exact replica of iOS. And since Apple will never license iOS, they will never have the market saturation of Android. Most people don't choose Android because of the software. They choose it because it comes on a cheap or even free phone. So what if the success of the iPhone inspired a successful touch screen based OS?...big deal. Apple needs to get over it and move on.

McDonald's doesn't sue Burger King every 5 minutes, but they sell identical food, and McDonald's was first. There are no hamburger wars. Each company just concentrates on their own customer base. Each company spends their energy trying to win customers from the other, not trying litigate them into oblivion. Apple needs to take a page from their books.

i lol every time someone claims Bill Gates stole from Steve Jobs.
 
i lol every time someone claims Bill Gates stole from Steve Jobs.

What's crazy is that in 100 years, the Xerox PARC part of the story will be long forgotten and it will go down in history that Bill ripped Steve.
 
Any company worth a damn will patent every idea they ever imagined for the sake of protecting future innovations.

In Apple's case they learned a lot from the Microsoft fiasco in the 80's.

Putting up defenses to prevent another Bill Gates/Microsoft situation is a natural reaction.

When Steve Jobs returned to Apple he had lost the paranoia and said that the reason Apple was losing not that it was copied by Microsoft but that it had stopped innovating. He said that Microsoft did not need to lose for Apple to win. Before his death though he had upped the ratchet again with more vitriol than I ever saw in the 90s.

If Apple really had learned its lesson it would be: don't do something great and then spend all your time feeling like a victim and forget about the bigger picture. It makes for a very small-minded company.

And that's the mentality that some people have, like John Gruber for example, who somehow seems to think the world's most valuable company needs constant defending. A bigger way of looking at things will ultimately lead to longer term stability. Apple is successful but I don't know how stable it will be. Google is a very broad, non-angry, interesting company. Apple now reminds me of a child who has amassed a great deal of cookies and is going to keep them locked in a closet so no one else can have any, but eventually they'll rot. Not the best analogy I could think of, but the feeling of it applies.

Apple did something great with the iPhone in 2007. And Steve Jobs was right that it would take competitors about five years to catch up. And they have. So, they still had the 5 year lead as a benefit of being innovative. Isn't that enough? Or do they want to be entitled to be the best forever because at one point in time they were the best? Both iOS and Mac OS X need some innovation. It's sad to say this, but as someone who has been an Apple customer for over 20 years, I'd actually like to see Apple take a little dive only because it will help them be the company they were in the early 2000s when they were really stepping up with OS X and how they were with the iPhone in 2007. Now it's all business strategy and buying up flash chips, etc, which is what Tim Cook was always good at and still is, but to me, they haven't done anything that equals the original iPhone in the last 5 years. Granted, that's a high standard. But I say go for it rather than sitting on your winnings and trying to keep anyone else from winning.
 
This patent doesn't mean much.

I think the big reasons to choose iOS is the integration with the PC that Android completely lacks and the apps on the App Store. This thread is just fanboy reaction over small news.
 
When Steve Jobs returned to Apple he had lost the paranoia and said that the reason Apple was losing not that it was copied by Microsoft but that it had stopped innovating. He said that Microsoft did not need to lose for Apple to win. Before his death though he had upped the ratchet again with more vitriol than I ever saw in the 90s.

If Apple really had learned its lesson it would be: don't do something great and then spend all your time feeling like a victim and forget about the bigger picture. It makes for a very small-minded company.

And that's the mentality that some people have, like John Gruber for example, who somehow seems to think the world's most valuable company needs constant defending. A bigger way of looking at things will ultimately lead to longer term stability. Apple is successful but I don't know how stable it will be. Google is a very broad, non-angry, interesting company. Apple now reminds me of a child who has amassed a great deal of cookies and is going to keep them locked in a closet so no one else can have any, but eventually they'll rot. Not the best analogy I could think of, but the feeling of it applies.

Apple did something great with the iPhone in 2007. And Steve Jobs was right that it would take competitors about five years to catch up. And they have. So, they still had the 5 year lead as a benefit of being innovative. Isn't that enough? Or do they want to be entitled to be the best forever because at one point in time they were the best? Both iOS and Mac OS X need some innovation. It's sad to say this, but as someone who has been an Apple customer for over 20 years, I'd actually like to see Apple take a little dive only because it will help them be the company they were in the early 2000s when they were really stepping up with OS X and how they were with the iPhone in 2007. Now it's all business strategy and buying up flash chips, etc, which is what Tim Cook was always good at and still is, but to me, they haven't done anything that equals the original iPhone in the last 5 years. Granted, that's a high standard. But I say go for it rather than sitting on your winnings and trying to keep anyone else from winning.

Great post. I agree with 99% of it. But I do think the iPad deserves a spot on the trophy mantle next to the iPhone. It has certainly done for tablet computing what the iPhone did for phones.
 
Great post. I agree with 99% of it. But I do think the iPad deserves a spot on the trophy mantle next to the iPhone. It has certainly done for tablet computing what the iPhone did for phones.

That's true, but you could think of the iPad/iPhone as one product that was delivered in two different form factors over the course of several years. The iPad in development predates the iPhone. And to me, the iPad was not what I had hoped for. It's the one Apple product I don't "get." Of course it's hugely successful, and Apple deserves credit for that, but I did not expect it to be so popular nor do I understand its popularity. To me, the iPad was the first product where if you had taken a group of financial analysts and said, "Show me what Apple's tablet will be," they would have come up with the iPad. I know that for myself, text input is the limiting factor with an iPad. With the Mac, the mouse was a huge UI leap, with the iPod the scroll wheel was, with the iPhone touch was, but for a tablet, it seems to me that I was hoping Apple would have found some yet unthought of way to make entering text easier than tapping on the screen. I still much prefer laptops and don't mind carrying them around. I think it's interesting that Microsoft is going after the tablet market once again with the one UI issue I saw the iPad as suffering from, by including a keyboard. I don't know how it'll work out (I'm actually skeptical), but is interesting.

I supposed it's a bit random to knock the iPad for not having a great text-input method and not being that different from the iPhone, but it is the product that came out after the iPhone, so I guess that's why.

And who knows, maybe if I used an iPad for a longer period of time, I would "get it" but I've tried typing on them and I can't imagine using it in classes etc, and with the MacBook Air being so thin and nice, I can't imagine the need either. But I'm sure it's great for the many people that love them.
 
When Apple gets a bigger screen(over 4") and the OS catches up and allows the things Android does, then ill think about switching back.

Till then, forget it!

No way Im switching back. Looks like Apple lost ideas and can't compete with Android anymore, so they are filling patent claims and lawsuits against Android. They should rather think about how to be more innovative and offer better product.

I love Galaxy S3 and I can't see how could new iPhone with IMO boring iOS6 compete against them.
 
Was that the same judge who said "Samsung tablets were not as cool", which is the reason it can't be a copy? Maybe Apple should include that in their posts.
 
If you invent a time machine, fine. Patent the hell out of it.
But if you invent something that's not all that new, don't take the piss and start patenting everything, like scroll bars that hide.

I'm sorry, I love Apple's products, but these patent wars are ridiculous. It's acceptable to patent something that is original, and there can be no other way to implement it. Otherwise, you run the risk of creating an Apple monopoly, which is bad for consumers. Even if you love Apple, it will still be bad for you, as there's no competition to keep Apple ahead.

May be sensationalising things there a bit, but it is all getting a bit too far.
 
You are definitely a total fanboy...And a fanboy who up votes his own posts;)

These articles are not even worth reading.

Patents in this country are a joke. It's all got to change. And Apple is going to force the laws to change sooner rather then later with all the rediculous patents they apply for. They are taking advantage of a majorily flawed system. I don't fault apple for doing so, but it's laughable.

Yeah, 10 times. oh wait.....:rolleyes:
 
You can't possibly think Apple holds a key smartphone patent? Once which covers all smartphones? Maybe they have a main patent, but nothing that will screw everyone.

That's right, Apple being the swell company they are, all warm & fuzzy, would never be out to crush the competition. They believe in sharing...
 
The S3 is a better phone than iPhone. And I have an iPhone. Android has caught up to iOS, Apple knows it, and Android is willing to take its OS to places Apple tells you you don't need it to go. I was once all for Apple but now it's kind of sickening to see people blindly agree with whatever Apple does.

It's very sickening, actually. Apple knows Android is catching up fast.

Everyone entitled to their own opinion. I can't imagine that someone's preferred mobile OS choice is making you sick. Each to their own.

----------

That's right, Apple being the swell company they are, all warm & fuzzy, would never be out to crush the competition. They believe in sharing...

It's not about sharing or keeping patents to yourself as a choice. There are huge legal repurccusions if someone/a company doesn't defend their IP, including losing the patents as it becomes creative common or whatever term patent lawyers use.

----------

Blame Bill Gates if anyone. Apple was never going to allow that situation to happen again without a fight.
Wait, so your saying that just because windows has a GUI, neat fonts and uses a mouse as a tracking device windows copied Mac?
 
Wait, so your saying that just because windows has a GUI, neat fonts and uses a mouse as a tracking device windows copied Mac?

There is so much history behind that it's not even funny. You should really look into it and know what Technarchy meant by that statement.
 
There is so much history behind that it's not even funny. You should really look into it and know what Technarchy meant by that statement.

I'm well versed in Apple/technology history. Infact I know about what happened with Xerox also, who's copying now?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.