Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

300 comments

Android is a patent minefield (-1, Troll)

O422 (2737869) | about a year ago | (#41435929)

It really shouldn't come as a surprise - Android is a patent minefield and Google doesn't offer any guarantee. Companies should go with something tested like Windows Phone 8.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (5, Insightful)

Big Hairy Ian (1155547) | about a year ago | (#41435961)

If its Android that appears to be breaching patents surely they should be suing the Android/Google collective.

Re: Android should patent! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436547)

Android isn't!
Heck, google should go patent these same things, pinch and zoom, etc.

The juror himself said it!

The iPhone uses the A4 (or A5 or whatever it is now) processor, android ones don't. If Samsung tried to run their code for pinch-and-zoom on the iPhone, it wouldn't run without errors.

This means that Samsung could patent, and the iPhone's prior art wouldn't invalidate!

You heard it here first! Juror gives everyone the ability to patent almost everything in the software realm, by making patents processor specific. .... more specific than ".... on the internet" patents!

Android isn't a patent minefield (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436737)

The USPTO is a patent minefield, granting obvious stuff simply because certain Americans think its hard to do.

Corroborative commentary which by no means reflects the view of the author of this comment and merely serves as an indicative backdrop to the post as a whole.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdIWKytq_q4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE

Even understanding simple issues like what was actually at issue seem too hard for most.

It wasn't Android that was in dispute but Samsungs own extensions that made it more Apple like which is why Google didn't pile in.

Note: Google/Motorola has now piled in and is asking for a United States wide ban on all Apples products.

http://www.usitc.gov/press_room/news_release/2012/er0917kk3.htm

One might see this as a retaliatory strike, who can tell, you reap what you sow.

But you have a to call to question the sanity of a process for instance that in the SCO v IBM case is still rumbling on after 9 years in the USA where as in the rest of the world, Germany for instance ... a simple and commensense approach was merely to say go away SCO and pay £30,000 euros every day you keep spouting bollocks.

How long will the Apple v Samsung go for I wonder?

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120923233451725

Re:Android is a patent minefield (3, Interesting)

Petron (1771156) | about a year ago | (#41437281)

I'm a big Android fan, I've used various Android ROMs on my rooted phone, and on my tablet. Over Labor Day I got my hands on a Samsung Galaxy 5 Player. This was unlike any Android I've used before. The UI was re-worked quite a bit and my first reaction was "This feels more like an Apple device". The desktop (for lack of a better word) was set up so the home page was the first window, and all extra were on the right (like Apple, where android has the home be the center window). The icons in the app tray had a background image put behind them that made it feel very apple like. The Samsung apps on it looked like Apple apps (Like a notepad that had the same icon as Apple's app). It wasn't a stretch to see many of the UI elements were taken from the iPhone. It was to the point where I had to search for settings, because the UI was more Apple-like than Android-like.

As much as I hate to say it, as I really loathe Apple products... I think Apple has a case here for the specific devices that the look/feel were copied. The Samsung S3 has a much more "Android" feel to it. It isn't Android, but a custom ROM Samsung made using Android to make their own version of an iPhone.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41437679)

If or when OEM (Samsung in this case) goes and downloads Android source code and then makes own distribution for their own device, by replacing Android launcher with its own launcher, what then breach patents what third party owns, why should the Android source code maintainer be responsible for that what OEM does?

If I take Linux source code and I make modification and distribute it in my device and then someone accuse me from patent infiringment, why should anyone else be accused from it, if the infiringment was only in my code?

And what if I only did what I came up, or what I have done long before the one who accuse me from infiringing their patent?

Like on Apple v. Samsung case, F700, Ericsson (don't remember now the model), S60 software platform and user interface etc... They are all prior arts for iPhone, but still Apple got Judge to deny Samsung rights disallowing those evidences to be presented. If someone can not bring evicende of prior arts and after all Jury goes and don't even count Prior art at all, the whole case is bogus, a TOTAL FAILURE!

And even after that, if someone else than accuser has done something, why should that have a rights to patents instead the ones who have prior art?

Re:Android is a patent minefield (2)

thaylin (555395) | about a year ago | (#41435979)

I take this is some sort of troll attempt. Tested, Windows phone 8? indemnification? no one offers that.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (3, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#41436133)

I'm not sure how anyone could even offer 'tested' in the present legal climate. Aside from the fact that individual judges and juries are unpredictable, are there even enough paralegals with relevant knowledge of US patent law to throw at the problem of determining whether a given complex system is noninfringing or legitimately licensed against all currently valid patents? That's an epic task search and (somewhat)natural language processing problem.

Indemnification is at least possible; but if you are practically guaranteed to have a few trolls hit you for low to moderate millions in the rocket docket, and there is the possibility of a huge lawsuit or two, it isn't going to be inexpensive, since it'll basically amount to insurance...

Re:Android is a patent minefield (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41435987)

4 comments, all anti-Google. Getting boring now, Mr. Troll.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436071)

4 comments, all anti-Google. Getting boring now, Mr. Troll.

What this site really needs is an AI filter that sends all anti Google comments directly to /dev/null.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (2, Insightful)

hugortega (721079) | about a year ago | (#41436145)

What this site really needs is an AI filter that sends all Samsung vs Apple news/comments directly to /dev/iamsickofthat

Re:Android is a patent minefield (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436225)

Ahhh, fandroidism at it's finest.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436605)

"Thou shalt not speak ill of google on slashdot." Yeah, that's a good idea...

moron.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436003)

Even if you want to ignore Apple, Motorola is the only major android manufacturer which hasn't signed a patent licensing agreement with Microsoft. Motorola has also been found guilty of infringing Microsoft's patents in Germany.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (3, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | about a year ago | (#41436935)

On what? Long filename schemes that weren't the least bit inventive?

Re:Android is a patent minefield (4, Insightful)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year ago | (#41436007)

I sincerely hope microsoft is paying you to create new accounts and shill on slashdot. Because if you're just doing this for free, that's pretty sad.

Conversely, if MS is wasting money trying to get slashdotters to like the windows phone, that's really funny.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436249)

*facepalm*

Do you really think Microsoft is spending money on converting /. users to their way of thinking? Honestly, do you see Slashdot as being that significant?

If Microsoft wanted to troll everyone here, they'd buy ad space from the Slashdot's parent company to appear here, not pay idiots to create a million puppet accounts full of inflammatory, poorly spelled diatribes. Grow up.

(coming from a 10-year reader)

Re:Android is a patent minefield (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436427)

Considering this is anon, (woo like this!) Its alot more safe to assume 10 year reader means he reads at the level of a 10 year old.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436653)

Except he makes more sense than the paranoid fools that keep going on about paid shills.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436773)

Except adding in how long you have read something to add weight pretty much negates everything. I should know, I've been reading stone tablets since before we had language!

Re:Android is a patent minefield (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41437175)

Let's consider two possibilities and decide which is more likely.

1) Microsoft is paying some advertising company to continuously create accounts and make first posts which get instantly modded to -1 and change nobodies mind about anything.

2) You just got trolled on the internet.

You decide.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (3, Funny)

NatasRevol (731260) | about a year ago | (#41437675)

Gonna have to go with #1. Makes the most sense.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (4, Insightful)

Twinbee (767046) | about a year ago | (#41437663)

Good to see paranoia reign supreme on Slashdot. Of course it must be that he's a paid shill, and not one of a hundred more reasonable and boring possibilities such as:

1: He genuinely thinks that Microsoft's phone is a safer bet in case Android gets in more trouble
2: He's a fan of Microsoft products or dislikes Google (yes, someone can still like a company, yet not work for them).
3: He said it ironically/trollingly to get a reaction, as he too dislikes the patent mess, and wants people to get fired up about it (to motivate them or something?)
4: He's somewhat ignorant about the whole (complicated) situation (as I suppose everyone is to a degree)
5: Any combination of the above

Re:Android is a patent minefield (1)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | about a year ago | (#41436103)

It really shouldn't come as a surprise - Android is a patent minefield and Google doesn't offer any guarantee. Companies should go with something tested like Windows Phone 8.

I think you forgot to mention how VS is the best development environment, bar none.
You're slipping.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about a year ago | (#41436239)

That was last week's sales pitch.

They came up with a new one for this week.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (1)

oji-sama (1151023) | about a year ago | (#41436501)

Yeah, I'm sure Microsoft pays and keeps paying for negative publicity. I'm betting those are created by some Microsoft hating trolls. And based on replies they seem to be quite successful.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (1)

oji-sama (1151023) | about a year ago | (#41436853)

Or just trolls.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (3, Insightful)

Conspire (102879) | about a year ago | (#41436285)

Yes, well unfortunately if companies go with "something tested like Windows Phone 8", there is no business model because nobody will buy their products.

Re:Android is a patent minefield (2)

SiChemist (575005) | about a year ago | (#41436363)

Nice try Steve Balmer!

Re:Android is a patent minefield (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436891)

Tell Microsoft to go suck on a dick, you fucking troll. Get the fuck off /.

Again (5, Interesting)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | about a year ago | (#41435973)

At this point Apple is actually copying Samsung, Samsung is a full generation ahead of where the iPhone in both hardware and software is, so anything that Apple does to the iPhone is just following Samsung, I think Samsung should come back and drive Apple into the ground.

Re:Again (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436011)

1 - Recent benchmarks tend to disagree with you.

2 - Can you please state your definition of "copying"?

Re:Again (5, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | about a year ago | (#41436287)

Apple wins in GPU benchmarks, but Apple hasn't innovated with the iPhone in a while. All the key features in both iOS 5 and iOS 6 existed in Android and Windows Mobile first.

When they announced the 4S and 5, you'll note neither have any key innovations.

People want to credit for the full-screen bar phone with multi-touch as this brilliant design that everyone copied. In reality, it is a common sense design that appeared in sci-fi for a reason. Once it became affordable to make it reality, then 3 different companies came up with the same design at the same time (LG, Samsung, Apple). What has Apple done since then literally other than copy heavily from those around them?

And yet they play the victim.

Re:Again (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about a year ago | (#41437723)

Apple wins in GPU benchmarks, but Apple hasn't innovated with the iPhone in a while. All the key features in both iOS 5 and iOS 6 existed in Android and Windows Mobile first.

But the issues are not just "features".

There is a lot "under the hood" in terms of engineering and the industrial design elements (I'm sure you can design all the features anyone could want in a 10 pound brick).

Re:Again (3, Informative)

BMOC (2478408) | about a year ago | (#41436579)

Recent benchmarks? Oh wait, did you forget that you're comparing against a bazaar of active innovation (funny how actual innovation moves fast, isn't it?) that comes out with a new phone once a week? So just wait a few days and Apple will again be lower on the bar in terms of performance again. Of course, it'll take Apple another 2 years to again get themselves back on top, but it will have been worth it to have the best specs for such a short time frame.

Re:Again (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436745)

GPU benchmarks sure. The CPU in some Android phones is faster still than the A6 processor. And how does a benchmark indicate copying technology or designs? The fact of the matter regardless if you like it or not is that all companies copy each other in the attempt to stay competitive in the market. If the first company to make a touch screen phone was the only one allowed to because they did it first we wouldn't have an Iphone today. The fact that Apple screams and cries while rolling on the floor in front of judges made me turn away from their products. Good products that I can recommend to people but their actions speak that they do not want to compete but rather control the market with law suits.

Re:Again (0, Troll)

andy16666 (1592393) | about a year ago | (#41436085)

If "ahead" is bigger, heavier and more power hungry then you might be right. If ahead is smaller, lighter, faster and with more available content and software then you're dead wrong.

Re:Again (4, Insightful)

Zemran (3101) | about a year ago | (#41436651)

22 grams will not worry me but the iPhone 5 is Talk time: Up to 8 hours on 3G and the Galaxy III is up to 11 h 40 min (3G), I can manage that extra 22 grams in my pocket for 50% more use. As for ahead, I think that means the iPhones dual core 1.2 compared to the Samsung quad core 1.4. Content, total freedom instead of restricted, Samsung wins hands down.

Re:Again (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436719)

I see you've fallen for the better specs = better phone myth.

Better pray you don't read about how much faster the iPhone 5 is than the S3.

Re:Again (4, Informative)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#41436859)

It's not. Read the article again, they rigged the tests.

Re:Again (1)

GodInHell (258915) | about a year ago | (#41436951)

Not fast enough to make me go into the walled garden.

Re:Again (1)

andy16666 (1592393) | about a year ago | (#41437397)

The S3 doesn't even have a quad core in most markets. But a fast dual core processor is going to give you better performance hands down in a phone while also giving you better power performance. That's why the new iPhone beats it in the benchmarks. Even in a desktop, it's questionable whether there's sufficient parallel workload for a quad core to used efficiently. The clock speed is also irrelevant here: Apple has doubled the performance of the chip by using their own custom ARM core without substantially increasing the clock speed. At this point, ARM chips have a long way to go in terms of IPC performance, and higher clock speeds (and the exponentially higher power they use) are not where it's at.

So I'm sorry, but overclocked quad core processors are not the next (or current) big thing in phones.

Re:Again (-1, Troll)

garcia (6573) | about a year ago | (#41436127)

I doubt Apple will ever copy the cheap feeling the Galaxy SIII has when you hold it in your hand. I have been an iPhone user since the 3G (10/2008) and was interested in seeing how the Galaxy SIII would be as a replacement device knowing all the great things people are saying about it.

I picked it up in the store and it felt cheap, almost like a child's toy. Light yes, durable, not so much. As someone who dropped their iPhone4 less than 72 hours after purchasing it and watching the back glass shatter, I wanted something more durable. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear the S3 would help me much in that area [mashable.com] .

I played with the device for about 25 minutes and found myself saying, "meh". While I'm glad there is a choice between Apple and Android phones and a wide variety to choose from for those who like that sort of thing, I decided to stick w/the iPhone.

I picked mine up Friday morning (the Verizon store told me if I was there by 8 AM I could get one) and I have been pleased. It's not perfect by any means I don't want to say the device is flawless, but as someone who has used both, I still much prefer the iPhone to the S3 and don't see any copying at all.

YMMV.

Re:Again (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436321)

So playing with the phone for 25 minutes now counts as "using" the phone?

You are an iphone fan. Like may other iphone fans even if you were handed a cell phone that was better in every way you would still say the iphone was better.

Personally I feel you need to use a phone for a few weeks to begin to get used to it. All cell phones should have a 60 day trial period. You use the phone for 60 days. You can return that phone for any reason no questions asked up to 60 days. That way you can actually use the phone and see how it works for you. I know never going to happen, but it would be good to have that.

Re:Again (1)

ameen.ross (2498000) | about a year ago | (#41436429)

Let's wait until Samsung brings out a version with a smaller screen, hmm? That would be a fairer comparison for a drop test.

Re:Again (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | about a year ago | (#41436481)

were you afraid the plastic back of the GS3 would shatter too ? I'm fairly sure it wouldn't ^^

Re:Again (0)

garcia (6573) | about a year ago | (#41436587)

The iPhone has a metal back now. I don't see your point.

Re:Again (5, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | about a year ago | (#41436991)

> I doubt Apple will ever copy the cheap feeling the Galaxy SIII has when you hold it in your hand. I have been an iPhone user since the 3G

I dumped my 3GS for a Galaxy phone. This "cheap feeling" propaganda is just mindless rhetoric that is the last resort of fanboys that don't have enough clue to criticize something meaningful.

You can't say anything technical so you go for the most superficial and subjective thing you can.

Re:Again (1)

Zemran (3101) | about a year ago | (#41437427)

I totally agree that we need choice, I do prefer the S3 but I much prefer having choice. My g/f and my son have iPhones and I have Android. We are all happy with what we have and do not have any problem with the other liking something different. The Apple/Samsung case is bad because they are taking away choice. Fight it for that reason.

Re:Again (5, Interesting)

Zemran (3101) | about a year ago | (#41436357)

You will have to remember that you are writing to a predominantly American audience and they have no idea of what the Samsung range of phones really look like. Have you seen the piece of shite that gets called a Galaxy II in the US and compared it to the Asian version. It is a completely different phone. Yes, Samsung are streets ahead of Apple but as Apple have managed to keep most of the Samsung products off of the American shelves the people there have no idea of where the real market is these days.

I was looking at tablets yesterday and there is no way that I would consider the Apple. I do prefer its gestures but it is so far behind in features (i.e. USB and microSD) that it is no good for my needs as I need a lot of storage. The phones are the same, I like the Apple but a couple of nice touches and gestures compared to usablilty means that it is not a contender and then when you look at the power of the Samsung you stop even considering the Apple.

I am an Apple fanboy or rather was prior to iOS. I much prefer using OSX with the ability to use the BSD CLI etc.

Re:Again (1)

puto (533470) | about a year ago | (#41437493)

Actually, I live in America and work for ATT, everyone knows about Samsung and many Iphone users have jumped shipped for the note and the s3.

And looking around in a building where a 1000 people work, the majority have moved to android.

Re:Again (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436487)

At this point Apple is actually copying Samsung, Samsung is a full generation ahead of where the iPhone in both hardware and software is, so anything that Apple does to the iPhone is just following Samsung, I think Samsung should come back and drive Apple into the ground.

Apple stole the touch screen technology from Neonode. Neonode had the technology a full three years before Apple. "Good artists copy, great artists steal." Steve Jobs

Re:Again (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year ago | (#41436623)

That and features you can get on your iphone by jailbreaking. When I upgraded to iOS5 it was because apps I needed were no longer compatible with iOS4, not because of any features: I already had pretty much all of them. If anything, I lost some features, at least until I jailbroke again.

Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (4, Insightful)

andy16666 (1592393) | about a year ago | (#41435983)

Is anyone else sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung?

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436015)

No, I love hearing about it. Especially because I used to love Apple. Now I see them as monstrous bullies.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (-1, Troll)

andy16666 (1592393) | about a year ago | (#41436047)

I don't really care what a company does. If I like their products, I buy them. :) Anything else is silly.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436155)

Yeah same here! I don't give a fuck about Foxconn employees committing suicide, and being paid so little they have to live in their workplace, as long as I can has the shiny!!!! I'll carry it around as I'm styling in my Nike's made by under-aged slave labour in China, eating my chemical filled McDonalds spit burger because they taste sooo good!!!!

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436207)

If you are buying anything based on what sort of labor makes it, then you're probably buying nothing. Manufacturing work is shit work, and has been since the dawn of time.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436281)

Your computer was made at those Foxconn factories.

You murderer.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436367)

Don't assume he's using a computer. He might be using a TCP-enabled Abacus!

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (1)

SpaghettiPattern (609814) | about a year ago | (#41436391)

I don't really care what a company does. If I like their products, I buy them. :) Anything else is silly.

Skindeepity.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (4, Insightful)

PortHaven (242123) | about a year ago | (#41436447)

Really, but if you dislike their products, and they're trying to prevent you from buying any thing else...that's when it gets personal.

So I am using the system, I am meeting with my Senator. I am objecting, and if the courses available to me fail to achieve results than I will have to consider alternative forms of protesting Apple.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (1)

andy16666 (1592393) | about a year ago | (#41437685)

I understand your fear, but it looks like the market forces in favor of Samsung are orders of magnitude stronger than the legal threat from Apple, for starters. This verdict is not an existential threat to competition. In fact Samsung's next products are unlikely to be in violation of Apple's patents in the first place.

Regardless of what Apple wants (every company wants to get rid of competition) they have to work within the law and the law isn't likely to make Apple a monopoly any time soon.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (0)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#41436803)

Godwin time. Yeah, those Nazis are a pretty evil bunch, but they have really snappy uniforms.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (1)

jedidiah (1196) | about a year ago | (#41437035)

> I don't really care what a company does. If I like their products, I buy them. :) Anything else is silly.

Except the bully here is trying to interfere with that.

So other objections are hardly silly.

You seem eager to support or tolerate those that would strip the rest of us of our freedom to choose.

Apple really is the new Microsoft.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41437719)

If you like Samsung's products, you'll LOVE Apple products.

It's almost like Samsung did a poor copy of Apple products....

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (2, Informative)

hillbluffer (1684134) | about a year ago | (#41436057)

Yes, but Slashdot's new corporate owner has the editors posting stories that will bring the most clicks from the general public, not "news that matters".

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (1)

Sique (173459) | about a year ago | (#41436301)

If stories don't generate clicks from the nerd folk, then they don't matter to the nerds. So they aren't enough news for nerds and don't matter to them.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (1)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | about a year ago | (#41436379)

Yes, but Slashdot's new corporate owner has the editors posting stories that will bring the most clicks from the general public, not "news that matters".

In other news, articles posted are the ones most likely to get clicked.

This kind of stuff has been getting posted for years - often in a way that cause people to make comments just like yours. It predates even the acquisition by geeknet.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (1)

csumpi (2258986) | about a year ago | (#41436407)

I think that actually started some time ago. Right around when timothy took over. But you're right, it might just get even worse.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (2)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | about a year ago | (#41436973)

You're about 10 years late to the bitch party about lame stories only being there for ad revenue.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (5, Interesting)

Morrighu (2737899) | about a year ago | (#41436079)

Is anyone else sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung?

Unless you want the only mobile device you can ever buy to be Apple, I'd suggest that you take a bit more interest in it. Because if things keep going the way they are, there will be NO other choice in cell phone or tablet. You will either pay Apple's premium price for 2nd rate hardware and 5th rate support or you will do without.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (0)

andy16666 (1592393) | about a year ago | (#41436105)

That's nonsense. There is exactly zero risk of Apple pushing every other company out of the cell phone market or even of gaining majority market share. It's just not something you need to worry about.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (5, Insightful)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about a year ago | (#41436521)

It's just not something you need to worry about.

You're living in the exact blind loyalty dream world that every monopoly hopes people will live in.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (1)

andy16666 (1592393) | about a year ago | (#41437545)

It's just not something you need to worry about.

You're living in the exact blind loyalty dream world that every monopoly hopes people will live in.

Blind loyalty to who? I just don't think that there's likely to be a monopoly in phones. There's strong competition and has been for years now and the market is too saturated for one company to make a major share grab at this point. You'd literally have to kill or almost kill one or two of the current platforms for that to happen. Perhaps it's true that Apple wants to kill Android but legally, I don't think it has a leg to stand on.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436255)

Is anyone else sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung?

Unless you want the only mobile device you can ever buy to be Apple, I'd suggest that you take a bit more interest in it. Because if things keep going the way they are, there will be NO other choice in cell phone or tablet. You will either pay Apple's premium price for 2nd rate hardware and 5th rate support or you will do without.

Oh for god's sake this is not the Jedi vs. the Sith we are talking about here. This is just another patent battle between two soulless mega-corps. There have been many like it before and there will be many like it in the future. Apple and Samsung will slog it out in court until the CEOs both companies finally exhaust their testosterone reserves and instruct their underlings to negotiate some sort of settlement. In the mean time you should read this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Make_a_mountain_out_of_a_molehill [wikipedia.org]

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year ago | (#41436681)

This is just another patent battle between two soulless mega-corps

That doesn't mean one isn't better for us consumers than the other one.

Today for lunch, I could eat leftover chili from last night, or I could eat a moldy sandwich that happens to be in the fridge. I don't know how old the sandwich is, but I'm guessing it will make me sick.

Neither is delicious pizza, which I want to eat, so I guess it doesn't matter which one I eat, huh? I'll just flip a coin.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436791)

Unfortunately geeks or nerds tend to lack real perspective. The companies involved are marketing the hell out of these devices, making them seem more important than they are, and everyone, including the nerds are eating it all up. And the nerds go to war over it on the internet forums (because that's all they really do about anything they care about usually...post messages).

There are much more important things going on in the world. The amount of passion is way to high for this topic in my opinion, and I wish they'd divert it to something a bit more important.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (4, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | about a year ago | (#41437135)

No. We just have some understanding of what's going on here.

This just isn't about two marketing machines fighting. The US patent office and the US courts are involved. That makes the stakes considerably higher. The results could have serious long term consequences.

In terms of "the big picture", patents very much matter.

In some place they mean the difference between life and death.

Your just trying to white wash the situation and pretend that there is nothing serious or important going on here.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (5, Interesting)

Dixie_Flatline (5077) | about a year ago | (#41436291)

What an utterly ridiculous statement.

Even Google said that Samsung was probably making their products look a little too much like the iPhone.

And then you've got the Nokia Lumia series, which not only doesn't infringe (and is a design that Apple themselves used to show that you can build a non-infringing phone), it's far and away the most beautiful phone design on the market today, in my mind. I WISH Apple would make something that looks like that. (I like my iPhone 4, but that Lumia really does look amazing.)

Oh, and the Windows phone OS design is ALSO an indication that you can build something that isn't anything close to the iOS design.

In my mind, Apple's crazy patents are the BEST way to ensure that there's choice in the market, not just choice between two of effectively the same thing. It's the big departures from the well established norms that bring interesting things to us. Apple's original entry into the Smartphone space was hugely disruptive, and they were very successful. Samsung has piggybacked on that success, whether you agree that they infringed or not. It's going to take another company doing the same sort of wild thing to really bring us something new and innovative.

Like I said, I own an iPhone 4, but I don't expect Apple to do anything innovative with their phone for years, if ever. They've made the product they wanted (something high quality and easy to use), and they'll stick with that--and that's not a terrible thing. There are worse ways to run a business. But for me to get EXCITED about phones again, well, that'll take someone doing something really revolutionary that I can't miss. Right now, beyond expectations, that looks like Microsoft. If they can really strike out on their own and differentiate their phone from everyone else, they'll claw their way into contention.

But Apple vs. Samsung is really just a sort of nitpicky argument. The iPhone 5 is better in some ways, and the Galaxy is better in others, but they do the same basic things. It's like comparing fridges. Both of them keep your food cold, but one has an ice dispenser and the other has a digital temperature readout. You pick and choose based on your needs at the time, but the Smartphone market is basically a choice between dull appliances now.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (-1, Troll)

JoeMerchant (803320) | about a year ago | (#41436627)

This is an interesting perspective that I have been attempting to articulate (not really, but anyway...)

Samsung copied Apple - plain as day, any third grader could make the call, and, effectively, a panel of 3rd grade educated jurors did make the call, even though they were too bored by the legal stuff to bother to answer the actual legal questions presented.

In a twisted sense, justice is served - we all know that they copied and that copying is bad, so they got their guilty verdict, legal machinations be damned.

Is there some way to turn this fuzzy justice into actual practicable law? If so, we might dispense with whole libraries full of boring legal precedents, patents, etc.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (0)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | about a year ago | (#41436083)

Is anyone else sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung?

Count me in.

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436257)

Me too!! ;-)

Re:Sick of hearing about Apple vs. Samsung (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | about a year ago | (#41436505)

Actually, not me. I find it fascinating, because it seems so wrong in almost every possible way.

I'm actually anxious to know if they fix it on appeal, and how fast, and with what consequences in the mean time.

I thank y#ou for your time (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436061)

systems. The Gay file was opened to stick somethin6 is the worst off than this BSD box, too many rules and Else up their asses America. You,

What do you mean "failed to follow the law?" (0, Troll)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about a year ago | (#41436063)

It is so easy to follow the law. I just opened maps.google.com, and typed "follow" in from, and typed "the law" in the to edit box. Clicked on Get Directions. It wanted some clarifications, I clicked on the random choices offered. Presto, clean and clear instructions to follow the law. See for yourself. https://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=Follow+the+Child+Montessori+School,+Follow+the+Child+Montessori+School,+1215+Ridge+Road,+Raleigh,+NC+27607&daddr=The+National+Law+Center+on+Homelessness+%26+Poverty,+The+National+Law+Center+on+Homelessness+%26+Poverty,+1411+K+St+NW+%23+1400,+Washington,+DC+20005&hl=en&sll=36.738884,-99.755859&sspn=54.042452,78.222656&geocode=FbdQIgIdoVBP-yl_nvUnxfWsiTFND7bxsHoxow%3BFXubUQIdtJNo-yHv1uqjwhL7QymHyYCQlbe3iTHv1uqjwhL7Qw&t=h&mra=pd&z=8 [google.com]

Wait a minute. Was the jury foreman using some pre release version of iPhone6 and did not have google maps? That could explain why he did not follow it.

MINE!MINE!MINE!MINE!MINE!MINE! (5, Funny)

hillbluffer (1684134) | about a year ago | (#41436095)

Apple and Samsung remind me of the seagulls in "Finding Nemo"....... "MINE!MINE!MINE!MINE!MINE!MINE!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4BNbHBcnDI [youtube.com]

War on Innovation (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436115)

Waiting for times when inspiring innovations in technology get more press than who in a courtroom wins the right to extract money from them.

It's too bad the juror wasn't on the supreme court (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#41436163)

I loved his position that a piece of prior art could be dismissed because the implementation discussed ran on a different processor architecture. Judicial functionaries have a proud history of pulling distinctions out of their asses and calling them 'tests'(later given first names, if they catch on more broadly); but that one was classic.

Re:It's too bad the juror wasn't on the supreme co (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41436569)

Yeah that quote was pretty bad. But I actually feel some sympathy for the jurors.. this case was so full of complicated issues, of trade dress, prior art, infringement, etc, and there were so many of these questions at hand (700??) that I don't know how any jury of laypeople could ever really untangle it all. I think they did just what most people would do. Boil it down to a couple of overly simplistic litmus tests, that you can just hold up each one to and say "yup,"yup","nope".. x700. Which of course is the wrong thing to do but that's just what happened. In this case, with the help of the foreperson who was clearly empathizing with the patent-holder from the beginning.

Re:It's too bad the juror wasn't on the supreme co (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#41437039)

Oh, I don't really blame the jurors for being dubiously clueful about ghastly intricate patent law(and probably unenthusiastic about spending months poring over the case), especially when the patent office itself has gone through a few waves of "just like things we did on mainframes and minicomputers; but over the internet and therefore novel!" and "just like things we did on PCs over the internet but on mobile phones and therefore novel!" patent grants themselves, and they are supposed to know better.

I just don't feel very comfortable about letting major court cases be decided by people who(even from their voluntary public remarks) are clearly out to lunch on what they are supposed to be deciding...

I hope so (0)

Zubinix (572981) | about a year ago | (#41436311)

Nuff said.

Prior Art (1)

Vlad_the_Inhaler (32958) | about a year ago | (#41436615)

If Samsung's defence was based on the Apple patents baing invalid because of prior art, why are they not attacking these patents directly? It may be a tough way to go but their current strategy is in trouble.

Re:Prior Art (4, Interesting)

punit_r (1080185) | about a year ago | (#41437177)

why are they not attacking these patents directly?

Samsung lawyers are doing that as well in one [groklaw.net] of the many filings. Basically calling each of the patents asserted by Apple invalid due to indefiniteness because of vague words like "substantially centered", ambiguous use of dotted lines in the design patents, and so on.

See comment here [groklaw.net] for a brief summary.

excerpt:
Claim 50 uses such a term of degree, requiring that the first and second "boxes of content" be "substantially centered" on the touch-screen display. JX 1046.49 (emphasis added.) [...] There are no tests, parameters, or other criteria for determining whether such a box is or is not "substantially centered."

Meh (1)

Arkiel (741871) | about a year ago | (#41436821)

Less talk about it because its as close to a foregone conclusion as you can get at this point in the Appeals process?

Maybe it's nullification (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41437047)

Some people say the jury didn't understand the law or didn't follow it. But I think it's valid to say they rejected the law and ruled by their own (warped) sense of justice.

If patent law is so complex that a jury cannot rule on it, why shouldn't they toss it away and make things up? Of course, yes, I realize there's an answer to that: it's unfair and just makes selling products all the more dangerous and risky so that only large companies will be allowed by the government to sell things.

But before we put the blame that on juries, I'm tempted to blame Congress for making such a rats nest, that juries are thrown into that situation.

Patent law as it currently exists, where you never know you're safe or not, until you die unsued, is unfair. However juries rule, and whether or not they comply with judges' attempts at jury tampering, they're still going to get it wrong much of the time.

This isn't like evil juries which might rule that killing a black man is never murder, whereas the black man accused of murdering a white perhaps will always just happen to be the correctly-identified perpetrator. Those are bad jurors and the law can't protect against that; if people want injustice then they'll have it. But with patents, even well-meaning jurors are likely to get things wrong, and the law is written in such a way (hugeness, complexity, and vagueness) to bias jury decisions toward being arbitrary.

And if you're a juror and the judge is telling you to do an arbitrary thing without any regard at all for right or wrong, there's no harm in blowing off the law completely and making your own law.

No harm.. except a bullshit ruling like we have in Apple vs Samsung. Ok, so there will be local variations here and there. On average, though, juries aren't making a broken situation worse. Even a Samsung victory in this case, though it would have been more just, still would have been random and arbitrary. It wouldn't have been because Samsung is right, but because of some obscure technicality.

Congress failed us here. But it doesn't have to be that way; we can make this good if we like. Send simpler and more obvious cases to juries, and you'll get fewer fuckups.

Re:Maybe it's nullification (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41437401)

It's called NULLification for a reason. That is to reject the law - not to make up their own. It seems like nullification should only be able to lead to a not-guilty verdict, for if the law is rejected, there is nothing left to indicate guilt.

Talk About Bogus Patent Claims (5, Insightful)

Morrighu (2737899) | about a year ago | (#41437199)

Everything that Apple sued over is prior art. Seriously.... 100% of it. I don't understand why Samsung's legal team didn't just go camp at the USPTO with their prior art and get those patents revoked. No patent = no law suit. What a bunch of screw ups. And Apple is infringing everyone from HTC to Mitsubishi to Nokia to IBM with their "patents". Feel free to pile on and offer up your own examples of prior art.... http://patents.stackexchange.com/questions/457/prior-art-should-invalidate-apples-patents [stackexchange.com]

Re:Talk About Bogus Patent Claims (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41437759)

Yeah, that guy doesn't seem to have any sort of patent legal training. Pretty much, I saw something like this somewhere else so it shouldn't be a patent. Except, you know, the METHOD of how things are being done differently.

No it won't (1)

humanrev (2606607) | about a year ago | (#41437469)

I'll be VERY surprised if the verdict is overturned. Why? Because history has shown that geeks absolutely suck when it comes to rooting for someone as far as court cases are concerned.

Evidence: Hans Reiser, Thomas-Rasset, Pirate Bay founders, Apple vs. Samsung. In each of those cases there were plenty of people on Slashdot who supported the defendant(s) and figured there was no way they'd be found guilty, much less with any serious penalties. Yeah about that...

So you can root for Samsung if you want. But I'll be surprised if the verdict is overturned simply because the courts aren't run by Slashdotters. Imagine if they were...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...