rustynails

Half of the facts are wrong may be a little steep. Do we breathe air? Does it contain oxygen? I'm sure some enthusiast will give me the composition of air (inc some stat on nitrogen:). There are many trivial facts that we know with confidence.

However, in a recent conversation with my mother, I asked her about a talking donkey in the bible. she confirmed the reference saying "the lord works in mysterious ways" and "donkeys could talk back then". Maybe there is some truth that 1/2 of our facts are wrong... If you skip religion, I view my mother as a very clever woman who is very astute with business. She was indoctrinated at a young age.

I really like the idea of duckduckgo, but it just doesn't do it for me. As an example, I can't find articles posted in the last hour, let alone the last week (eg. iOS 6 jailbreak).

I know it's slightly off topic, but this would certainly encourage me to use this - and I have a community around me that tends to adopt what I do.

In some ways, I think of jobsy as a great filterer - very focused. Both of your statements are somewhat true if you consider that perspective. Jobsy made a big difference by picking the best and putting it together. However, what was put together was largely taken from others. Fickle? Maybe - just not as one dimensional as it may first appear to be.

History is not so simple as this guy points out. Jobs had a significant impact, no doubt. People like Carnegie were not so nice, nor Rockefeller, Edison, Khan, Atilla the Hun. However, history remembers these people just fine, for good and bad. I believe it's quite normal to see the good and bad in people, because in reality that's how we all are. Jobsy left on a high note, turned Apple around. He will be remembered - and fondly, might I hazard a guess.

Antenna gate wasn't real? I can reproduce the antenna fault with a significant drop in signal strength with one pinkie.

I classify that as a major fault. For a premium product, that's unacceptable.

Navigon for IOS TomTom for IOS www.google.com/maps in IOS

Take your pick. There are solutions that can be used to work around this issue and meet your needs.

See my post above. In many ways, I regret buying an iphone4. My wife's experience with nexus s has been much more hassle free than mine. There are definitely things I prefer on iPhone. One case in point is that although I often see crashes on apps, they just shut down quietly and I restart. Android let's my wife know that an app has crashed. I also upgraded my wife's phone to android 4.1. It took 5-10 mins total. I'm dreading my IOS6 update which I am estimating will take me 8h (inc. reinstall of my purchases via cydia - which I am forced to do if I want the functionality that I WANT vs what apple lets me have).

I've had a lot of grief with my iPhone 4. Let's see, 1. Shitty antenna - compensated with free case 2. Lack of free upgrades (Siri, maps) 3. Corrupted iPhone database meant I couldn't copy songs to my iPhone. Had to rebuild the phone to "recover" 4. All upgrades usually take me 1/2 a day to rebuild my phone, as everything is copied off and then back on. 5. Shitty iTunes that makes everything a bitch to get on/off my phone (see 3. Above). My wife has had almost no issues with her nexus s, nor has my best friend with his (inc. free unconditional upgrades) I'm not saying apple is bad, just saying the experience hasn't been as rosy as I would have "expected" given all of the pro IOS hype I read about, and the big price difference I paid vs the nexus s.

Not in my case. I bought an iPod over eBay a few years back. It was delivered faulty. I chatted with seller who said send it back. I told him I would when I "got back", which I did. Sent it registered. The guy stopped answering mail when he got the device. His reputation started to plummet very quickly, mine was 100%. PayPal refused to investigate because I notified them too late (about 6 weeks after purchase) despite emails, faulty item delivered and acknowledged. PayPal is a scam and I will never trust their buyer protection again. Http://www.paypalsycks.com/

>Why not make decisions for a few percent of companies turnover?

The problem is that this case wasn't really about Samsung, and it wasn't really about a few companies, or the fine. This was a high profile case about a broken IP system, a rogue gorilla and an outcome that stifles innovation in the technical arena (not just smartphones). You don't think someone will think twice before even going near Apple again, regardless of the validity (or prior art) of the patent? I am incredulous that anyone could have come to the conclusion of this juror, particularly someone with a tech background.

Hopefully, this won't be the last battle that could turn this madness around.

>I'm not saying that Samsung is innocent

You've got to get past this mindset. Was there prior art? Did Apple really invent this? Were the patents specific, non-obvious, etc.

No, No, ...

When you add that the outcome stifles innovation and a you add a broken IP system, you have so many nails in the coffin, it isn't funny.

Case closed.

No, do "hate the playa" (for want of a better term).

When you hear about the druggie who knocked someone on the head for a fix, the bigger culprits are 1) the law for driving the prices up to cause the druggie to need to rob someone to be able to afford a fix 2) the dealer for supplying the stuff at a high price and purposely "hooking" the junkie 3) the druggie, who has an addictive personality, but choses not to show the strength to say "no"

I place the blame in that order. A similar story can be said for Apple. Apple should be thought of poorly for being a playa. They knew their attack wasn't really at Samsung, or Google, or Android. It was at competition and innovation and hence, at society.

For the record, I come from a family where one member fell into category 3 (druggie). Unless you experience it, it's very hard to understand the non-monetary cost to a family when one of your ranks strays down the path of drugs and destruction. Thankfully, this black sheep seems to be on the mend after -decades- of abuse to us all.

I respectfully disagree. My thought process was 1. Passcode (alpha or numeric) 2. If I don't want a passcode, I need something else, and a single button won't do. Ok, drag something.

The conclusion is obvious. You could argue that I am biased, and it would be impossible for me to counter. However, IMHO, sliding something was the obvious answer.

I don't have an issue with in-app put purchases, it's like the old try-before-you-buy model. I have have spent 100s of hours playing "robot wants kitty" (with in-app purchase called kitty connect to get user levels) and "Solomon's keep" with its addons. Both apps are free (and brilliant), with optinal paid add-ons that make the game even better. If it weren't for these two games (with addons), I most probably would have traded my iPhone in.

I'd refute that Apple are the first to invent most things. They rehash someone else's ideas (shoulders of giants stuff). Your attitude is that first to market has a monopoly, which hurts society and offends me. Algorithms can be justified being protected, but not trivialities (eg. Beveled edges, scrolling lists). I posted earlier about knight Ridder v/s iPad (VERY similar looking devices, where Apple copied). I'm ok with that because the elements copied were simple, and frankly the best for their application at this time given technology. You've either taken Ives out of context or he was wrong.

Thank you for that insight mr Harrison. If you're talking about the packaging and connector, i completely agree. If you're talking about the form factor, I STRONGLY disagree.

Apple whole heartedly borrowed from knight Ridder. So what? The design is simple and makes sense. This is how society benefits - the simple stuff is copied. More complex things like algorithms deserve some protection, but not beveled edges, scrolling lists, etc.

Apple have behaved very badly in this law suit. They are not the only ones, but it does not excuse Apple at all.

My loyalty is to society and freedom to innovate (which includes standing on the shoulders of giants) - not to Apple or Samsung. I hope you share this perspective too, as your comment implied otherwise.

128kbit sounds so poor that I get a headache from listening to it. There is a tinnyness and high pitched squeal that is like a drill through my head. Maybe it's like using a 14" monitor - if you're so used to hearing low bitrate, it may be hard to notice better quality when you hear it occasionally.

I would say that 192kbit (2 pass, VBR) is the minimum bitrate that one should encode music. I can pick lower than this without trying. I do struggle to hear more than 192kbit, except occasionally at the high end. In reality, disk is so cheap that I encode in flac. I'd rather keep myself future proof. Let's just say that my entire cd collection is smaller than 2 bluray rips at 1080p.

I own five Apple devices, and no Android devices :)

From the article, QUOTE The interesting thing here is that the release of the SDK with support for touch and large screens, as well as the release of this video and hardware reference design took place one month before the infamous photograph of the BlackBerry-esque device. This means that Google wasn't working with just one prototype, but several, which really shouldn't be a surprise at all, if you think about what Google wanted Android to be.

Android was never intended to run on just one form factor. Android runs on everything from candybar touch screen phones to qwerty-phones, and everything in between. Heck, there was a race to get Android running on laptops, and even before Android was well and ready for it, it was dumped on tablets. UNQUOTE Emphasis on blackberry and touchscreen appearing at the same time, and that Android was always intended to be form factor independent.

How does this equate to "in 2005, Android was blackberry"? Reference please.

The fundamentals of patents may be very strong, but IIRC, the same does not apply to software patents, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_under_United_S...

IIRC, this discussion still needs to take place. I really, really hope that software patents are knocked on the head, unless there is true science, such as a complex algorithm, which should have a limited life of a few years AT MOST, otherwise my litmus test of "harm to society" is met.

You may want to re-read comatose-kid posting again. He doesn't support "others do it" as a justification.

Reference please. My understanding is that Android was always intended to be hardware independent, including supporting touchscreen "before iPhone" came out. The claims of a sudden change in direction are revisionist history to suit some people's agendas, http://www.osnews.com/story/25264/Did_Android_Really_Look_Li...

I am grateful for the competition between both groups (Android and IOS). This competition forces organizations to compete on merit, or the market votes with its feet.

Accidentally announced 1 mth before? Reference please. I believe it was longer than that, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada#iPhone_controversy

The reason this IS so important is because it re-enforces the "emergent technology" argument that many forget, which is the antithesis of what many argue...

Do you recall Knight Ridder had something looking almost the same as the iPad... In the video from 94, the speaker talks of emergent technologies enabling the future, not "first to market".

Society should outright reject any notion that emerge t technology is patentable, regardless if the "evil corporation" driving the insanity is Apple, Samsung, Google, etc

http://www.google.com/search?q=assange%20half%20asleep Take your pick of articles. Was she asleep? Anyone who had read all of the posts in this thread knows there is something suspect about this whole case. Simply interview the man where he can't be extradited to the US and be done with it.

He isn't accused of rape - it was "unprotected consensual sex", which is quite different. The charges were withdrawn by the women, but re-instated by someone TBD. I think the parent poster's description is closer to the mark. Democracy? Each to their own I guess.

Or Guantanamo for a suspected terrorist, or is that word no longer flavor of the month? I'm never sure these days. These fads come and go so quickly.

The problem is that a lot if people bought these shares under false pretenses. Decent returns are not visible to anyone who is truthful and open minded. There are two paths in this circumstance - sell now and cut your losses by buying something that will return better, or sell later at an almost certain lower price, and lose that potential in the mean-time. If it were me, I'd cut and run now.

YMMV. Let me explain. if you walk into a tv showroom, can you differentiate tvs from 10ft away? It's a poor Rgument to use the 10ft. The real issues are 1. Is it norm for companies/people to copy each other (eg. Apple iPhone from Sony). 2. How closely can you copy before you're doing real harm? 3. WhatP is the right balance in a patent that benefits society (NOT the inventor) the most? There is no doubt that Apple copied Sony. There is no doubt that Samsung copied Apple. If Apple win this case, patent madness will get even worse and society will suffer greatly. If Apple lose this case, it will encourage copycats, but it will also challenge the patent madness and be good for society in general. IMHO, the reason the judge excluded the Sony evidence was because Apple aren't on trial. - sent from my iPhone

Patents aren't about doing something new. They are non obvious ideas - read the definition please. Amazon 1 click patent was an example of idiodicy of "something new". This blasé attitude to patents is extremely dangerous. It stifles innovation and hurts society - the exact opposite of why patents were created. Imagine if i patented RGB 128, 179, 253 because I couldn't find that value hadn't been used before. Should this be patentable? What about patenting a piece of timber 3.914 ft x 1.234 ft? This is where Apple deserve a really hard kick in the balls. They patented something so generic and obvious that it is almost impossible not to breach it. You've heard the saying "standing on the shoulders of giants" - what it means is that technology has enabled a bunch of potential inventions. Patterns of these combinations emerge naturally - sine pick up on it quicker than others... But such incremental steps should not be patentable because someone else would have easily come up with the same thing. Now if you tell me that someone invented a new DSP, or a new compression algorithm that was genuinely different, then that is a good example. Ask the question: would someone have easily come up with it, roughly at the same time ... And... Does it help of harm society to grant this patent... Then and only then should a patent bd granted. - posted from my iPhone

I'm from OZ, and to be honest, I need the canned laughter when watching US comedy - because the humor is not obvious (eg. Will and Grace- canned laughter when a dog walks across the screen ... Ahh, Americans find that funny... Ok) Now British humor? I get that without canned laughter.