- cross-posted to:
- lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world
cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/5636484
You must log in or register to comment.
I certainly don’t take their side… but smartphones DIDN’T exist before the iPhone. Which phone would you say that was? BlackBerry?
Most people think of smartphones as a big touchscreen, and the iPhone was first, being released on June 29 2007, whereas the first Android phone was released over a year later in September 2008.Give him his due, he managed to convince one single country that the colour of a text message matters 😂
Did it to themselves
For real, if google didn’t completely screw up messaging every single year it wouldn’t be as big of a deal.
Nobody uses SMS anymore, it’s 2023
Hangouts was already the iMessage competitor. Video, voice, high res photos and videos, etc with SMS fallback. But as usual google kills every good product they create.
Gmail? Photos? Drive?
Hangouts didn’t have the next work effect, unlike Whatsapp
Steve Jobs was full of shit and killed himself with his own over confidence.
If he’d made it to Covid times, he would have died from Covid after injecting bleach and horse dewormer failed to alleviate the illness.
Dont embarrass yourself with the horse dewormer stuff.
Oh please do go on.
The guy had no furniture in his house because he couldn’t find any that met his expectations.
I think there’s an occasional lesson to draw from his uncompromising nature, focus on customer experience, and marketing talent. But he was clearly a pile of shit as a human being.
And in the end the lying salesman died because of snakeoil therapy. I wish more stories had such a happy ending.
He had the rare treatable pancreatic cancer, and he didn’t treat it because he didn’t believe in modern medicine.
Reminder that Steve Wozniak is the true Apple genius.
He’s also the guy that carries an Android in his pocket for all his fun stuff!
They both are. Woz wanted to create hobbyist boards without even casing. Jobs was the one that pushed for commercial use. Separately they probably wouldn’t have had anywhere near the impact as they did together. At best Woz would be Linus Torvalds.
Rich coming from a person who implied Apple innovated, when all they really did was be the first ones to assemble a consumer product out of already invented tech.
Removed by mod
In the end Samsung would owe Apple around $500 million in US courts and Apple lost (a value I’m not even going to sit here and add up) in international courts.
The whole US snafu was largely seen around the world as American protectionism. As for Apple and Google, Apple saw their case wasn’t as slam dunk internationally and decided to settle with Google in 2014.
Really though, once Steve Jobs died, the momentum for litigation dropped precipitously. Only Jobs was willing to go thermonuclear.
Mate I own a pre-iphone smart phone. What are you on about?
If you really wanna go back far enough, the first handheld, portable device which had both phone and computer technologies in one package dates as far back as the mid 90s. Touch screen and all. The term smartphone would first be coined in 1995. Heaps of other touch screen devices that could do phone calls, SMS, and had a suite of apps would come out in later years as PalmOS and later Pocket PC/Windows Mobile came to fruition in the late 90s/early 2000s. The iPhone was just iterating off technology and features already being seen in smartphones at the time, just in a sleeker, smoother, simpler manner with a capacitive touch screen rather than the resistive touch screens of most common devices at the time. Heck, the iPhone wasn’t even the first phone with a capacitive touch screen.
What did Android steal from Apple? Headphone jacks?
No idea, iPhone fanatics act like smartphones and apps didn’t exist before the iPhone… I mean maybe the idea of central app store that forbids installation of applications from other sources?
I mean maybe the idea of central app store that forbids installation of applications from other sources?
You mean like a Linux repository that existed before Apple “invented” the concept and renamed it an app store?
Didn’t we all end up just stealing a lot of todays shit from Xerox PARC anyway?
Fuck the slide to unlock discussion, let’s talk about representing hierarchies of files in a file system as folders in a graphical environment and why the thing that shows our position on a screen is a slanted arrow.
Apparently the whole concept of a touchscreen only device, including the UI, according to Apple at the time.
Like the computers in Star Trek TNG?
Can fictional products be used as prior art against real world patents though? The entire idea of patents is to protect something someone made work in the real world.
My understanding is that patents are to protect novel new ideas. If something’s already bean described in fiction, what innovation is protected by the patent?
So, I’d think “it’s a tablet” wouldn’t be patentable because that was described in Star Trek. But, "screen technology blah that makes tablets practical "would be patentable.
Neat post on related topic: https://fia.umd.edu/answer-can-science-fiction-stories-be-used-to-demonstrate-prior-art-in-patent-cases/
My understanding is that patents are to protect novel new ideas. If something’s already bean described in fiction, what innovation is protected by the patent?
The implementation in the real world. Fiction does not tend to go into how these machines work beyond that which is needed for the narrative. You won’t get enough information from such a book or TV show to be able to build something similar yourself, which is usually what you need for a patent.
I’m not saying that devices described by fiction are patentable based on the description in the fiction. But, those descriptions could be used to prove that the ‘invention’ is too obvious to be patentable. Page 7 of this document from the USPTO going over what ‘prior art’ is suggests that fiction can be used as prior art.
Fiction can only be used as prior art when what you see (or read about) is all there is to it, such as rounded corners. It works less well when there are details in the implementation that aren’t covered in said fiction or hand waved away with The Force or something. The sliding doors in Star Trek would be an example, as although the doors are seen to slide, you can still patent a mechanism that makes this effect possible.
Not exactly, patents have to be specific, not generic, and Apple purchased the company that invented multi-touch.
“The whole concept of a touchscreen device…” is something that prior fictional examples prove false. They did not come up with the concept, but they did implement a prior concept.
“Nobody thought of it” and “nobody made it before” are two different things. Apple even pretended the second was true when they weren’t even first to market on several of their products.
“The whole concept of a touchscreen device…” is something that prior fictional examples prove false. They did not come up with the concept, but they did implement a prior concept.
But that didn’t come from a patent filing, that was my commentary on how they behaved. Patent filing language is much more precise for this reason.
Patents are about implementation, not concepts.
exactly! That tablet you saw in Star Trek TNG is not an implementation, as it’s not a real device.
The iPhone was a novel concept as a whole. I think that’s undeniable. There was nothing like it at the time.
edit: found the iPhone haters and their revisionist history. The iPhone changed everything. When it was announced, nothing like it existed. Before the iPhone, google was working on a blackberry clone, for instance.
This is blatant HTC and Palm erasure.
Windows mobile and palm had existed for years before iphone.
Why do you suppose both those companies fell off the face of the earth right after the iPhone came out? How many 12 year olds had them? The paradigm clearly shifted after the iPhone came out.
Just as novel as the whole graphical desktop concept which they claim to be the ones who invented it but always forget to state that Steve Jobs stole it from Xerox? By Steve’s words, everything Apple does today is a stolen product.
There were a bunch of products that had elements of the iPhone in them, but the iPhone was the first to bring a lot of them together into a technology that made the world shit it’s pants.
The problem for Apple is, you cannot really patent nor copyright bringing together existing elements like that. Hence they had to rely on stupid sounding lawsuits on the tiniest things they actually had the patents for.
Dude a Nokia with Symbian was a smartphone… and that was in a couple of years before the iPhone was even being designed…
The handspring visor phone launched in 2000 was arguably the first smartphone.
Great artists steal… and can get away with it. If you can’t get away with it, your not s great artist.
He forgot to finish the sentence.
That top quote doesn’t mean what you think it means.
The bottom lacks vital context. Eric Schmidt, former CEO of Google was on the Apple board during the development of the iPhone and iPad and was privy to insider information all awhile pivoting Android from a blackberry rip off to exactly what Apple was doing. It’s similar to the Xerox thing back in the 80s where people think Jobs is being a hypocrite about ripping off their GUI when Bill Gates did it too. Apple paid Xerox in stock to see it, Microsoft just took it. Not illegal, but Jobs was pissed.
Yeah Steve, you really showed us Windows and Android users. Fuckin’ nerd.
