Hacker News Reader

You could have written the same about MS in the 90s.

It's not just that they're suing folks, it's that their actions seem to be deliberately designed to suppress the market and suppress competition. It doesn't feel genuine.

And while they do innovate, I don't think they do half as much they're given credit for. They didn't invent the smartphone, nor the mp3 player, yet most people likely think they did.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Apple has only really gone hard against Samsung over the design patents? There are lots of other Android makers who produce models very different to the iPhone but haven't come under attack (maybe because they aren't as successfully though). So it doesn't really seem right to say they trying to suppress the whole market.

At least with Apple they are trying to protect (justifiably or not) genuine, recent innovation, and they are being open about it. MS is suing more Android makers than Apple over alleged Linux patent violations in Android that it will not disclose (thus prevent Linus from fixing the supposed infringements), but probably relate to some ancient, legacy FAT file-system standard. This is just as dirty as the worst of MS misbehaviour in the 90s and shows they have not changed at all.

'(maybe because they aren't as successfully though)'

I think this is the key. Samsung are the target because they're making a huge success of their phones and threatening (even in the US) Apple's position as the perceived 'gold standard' for smartphones. That perception has already faded away in other parts of the world.

Perhaps they are only suing Samsung because only Samsung's designs are close enough to be covered by their design patents. That doesn't mean (to me) anything other than that the patent system is broken. I don't think that proceeding with these lawsuits is the right thing to do. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

I agree MS's android tax is just dirty, btw.

Nobody credits them for inventing the smartphone. They invented the iPhone. Nobody credits them for inventing the mp3 player. They invented the iPod.

Nobody? You don't read the popular press very much do you?

For a large percentage of the population, "mp3 player = ipod" and "smartphone = iphone".

An anecdotal example: a couple of years ago, I mentioned to my mother that I had bought an mp3 player. She sounded puzzled for a moment and asked 'is that like an iPod?'

Here's sort of the flipside of that anecdote:

Me and a group at my school are currently developing a mobile communication app for elderly for a interaction design-course, and we are in close cooperation with two local elderly homes for testing and feedback. During the initial phase we didn't settle on whether we should develop for iOS or Android but focused primarily on how the interaction should work. But after a while the local leader/our contact insisted that we develop for the iPad since the elderly at both homes had been to a iPad-workshop.

2 weeks later she tells us that she's bought two iPads for us that we could use for testing. When we get there, with our low-fi PowerPoint-prototype, it turns out that she's bought two Galaxy Tab's!

I'm sure many people think "mp3" means "digital audio file"

For an even larger percentage of the population, "tissue = kleenex."

That doesn't mean anything except that they made a damn good product and had A TON of marketing.

Speaking of Apple lawsuits, MS and the 90s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_v._Microsoft

> their actions seem to be deliberately designed to suppress the market and suppress competition

But then why aren't people on HN down on Samsung in the same way?

Because it didn't seem to be Samsung that launched a war to get Apple's products banned, it seemed to be the other way around.

I agree it is now an all-out war and neither side is going to come away clean, but in the most trivial sense 'They started it!'

But the original iPhone was banned from South Korea for 2 years, almost certainly at Samsung's behest.

The reason a lot of the technology crowd is against Apple is that Apple get incorrectly attributed as innovators. For those that actually work at the innovative frontier of the software industry, seeing the wrong company getting credit for other peoples hard work is infuriating.

One do not see the design crowd being angry at Apple. Those that work with design, tend to agree that apple is innovative in the area of design and user interaction. In the area of design, apple is correct to be attributed for being innovative and thus little hate.

But technology wise, apple has brought forth close to nothing in innovation, and has brought forth a bunch of obvious patent instead. Added, they lock down devices so to almost taunt those that want to innovate. Thus, As an technology developer on the market, Apple is a horrible company. The only positive thing Apple has given to technology developers has been the marketing power, which has opened up monetization for areas like smartphones and other handheld devices.

I think in this case, the story is more about Apple's disregard for the spirit of the court order than being down on Apple in general. I'm generally an Apple fan, but this seems kind of petty and oddly antagonistic towards the court.

Really? It seems about in line with what any corporation would write if ordered to give such a statement.

It ackowledges the judgement in the UK but also mentions conflicting judgements elsewhere in the world. Seems pretty balanced to me.

If they were truly told to write an apology, then people are down on them because this isn't one. You cannot really apologise for anything without using the words 'sorry' or 'apologise'.

This is B2B. Corporations do not apologise to each other. They may pay each other compensation, if ordered to.

Apologies imply feelings, and corporations do not have feelings.

...but corporations are people, and people have feelings! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood

I agree with you - but I've read in several places that Apple were ordered to apologise. Their feelings (or not) don't come into it.

[BTW - the linked text kind of implies that they do have feelings; the article comes off as surly, resentful and not a little childish...]

[EDIT: Seems like they were never actually ordered to apologise, only to clarify that Samsung did not, in the judgment of the court, infringe on anything.]

They may not have feelings, but they usually have more tact than this announcement displays.

I'm pretty sure a significant minority (majority even?) of HN readers make their living by writing software for Apple devices, or use them every day at work and at home as their technology of choice.

I think Apple's problem is, at least in part, one of standards - we hold them up to very high standards, both technology-wise, and also at an ethical level, Apple give out the message that they are "the good guys".

When someone you love turns out to be not quite as perfect as you imagined, the love can turn to hate or anger very quickly.

People don't like arrogant corporations. You know like the dystopian 1980's style fictional corporations in Robocop, Gremlins 2 etc.

Apple have tried their best to seek inspiration from the above. That is why people are hard on Apple.

Steve Jobs: "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this."

Having brought some innovation doesn't give you the right to be an asshole.

> I don't really get why everyone is so down on Apple on HN.

Yeah. Suing everybody around, blocking customers from buying products they want and http://www.5min.com/Video/Apples-Incredible-Great-Best-Gorge...

I wonder why less and less people likes them.