Apple lagano gubi patent bitku... not!

[yooyo]

Hm.. onda su trebali da smisle trademark iRetina, a ne samo Retina.
Sta je Jobs mislio kada je ponovio Pikasovu recenicu, samo Jobs, zna. Sva ta tumacenja sta je u stvari hteo da kaze su PR BS. Svako kapira kako hoce.
Jos samo da neko obori MS patent na VFat pa da se resimo trolova. Bas mi je drago sto je MS izgubio u Nemackoj protiv Motorole i sada ce biti zabranjena prodaja MS proizvoda u Nemackoj (XBOX 360, Win7, ...)

[RazbojNick]

Apple je zaštitio termin Retina kada je u kontekstu ekrana i gustine tačaka. Slično kao što je Intel uradio sa Core...

[kovacm]

Jos samo da neko obori MS patent na VFat pa da se resimo trolova.

u retro sobi sam okacio vest: neko je kao argument za osporavanje VFATa patenta dao primer Atari MiNTa (multitasking OS) gde su implementirali duge nazive fajlova u FAT jedno dve godine pre Microsofta




...sad sam pogledao sta je Apple patentirao vezano za retina ekrane:

http://www.razorianfly.com/2012/06/2...etina-display/

“Retina” display describes a method of LCD manufacturing which is designed to “[reduce] edge discoloration in an LCD display.”
Apple explains it does this by “[dimming] the first and last sub-pixel columns of a display,” to “mitigate edge discolouration.”

dakle nema veze sa retina rezolucijom.

[STriderKOCOBO]

Ipak je u pitanju softver, a ne hardver, sto se tice ovog Retina patenta. Na sajtu patentlyapple.com pise:

software may be utilized to automatically reduce the brightness of the first and last sub-pixel columns

Novinari k'o novinari, objave polovicnu vest, pa dovode ljude u zabunu.

Ali pazite ovo: apple je dobio pravo na patent za indikator kada je telefon upao u vodu. Rec je o traci koja se nalazi u telefonu i koja promeni boju kada se ovlazi. Evo detalja:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/06/a...icator-patent/

A to je imao moj matori SE W810i koji je izasao godinu dana pre prvog iPhone-a.

[zechs]

malo ste dosadni sa tim:



ako se vec citira, treba da se citira cela misao (govor) a ne da se vade fragmenti i da se tako menja smisao:

"In one of the most misinterpreted quotes of Steve Jobs's career, he said, "Good artists copy, great artists steal." Some critics have cited that quote to support their opinion that Steve Jobs does not have original ideas. But if you read the entire quote you will realize that Jobs was talking about finding inspiration outside of the computer industry-in other words, connecting seemingly unrelated things.

The entire quote reads: "It comes down to trying to expose yourself to the best things that humans have done and then try to bring those things in to what you're doing. Picasso had a saying. He said, 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' We've always been shameless about stealing great ideas. Part of what made the Macintosh great was that the people working on it were musicians, and poets, and artists, and zoologists, and historians who also happened to be the best computer scientists in the world." When one sees the quote in its entirety, it becomes clear that Jobs is not talking about stealing as much as he's reinforcing the notion of association, having diverse experiences that kick-start the creative process."

http://www.director.co.uk/ONLINE/201...teve_jobs.html

Mislio je covek na bezocnu kradju..to je i ono sto rade od kada su krenuli sa svojim iGlupostima..gomila pokradenih ideja i proguranih patenata, jer samo tako i mogu da opstanu

[kovacm]

^

koja glupost...

ajmo: sta su ukrali?

[vlab]

^

slide to unlock

[zechs]

^

koja glupost...

ajmo: sta su ukrali?

Ma daj molim te, pisani su eseji o tome šta su sve pokrali..uradi search i naći ćeš

[DariusIII]

Microsoft je kriv za sve!

TM by kovacm.

[DukeofSerbia]

^

koja glupost...

ajmo: sta su ukrali?

Ti baš ne pratiš vesti ?!

[DukeofSerbia]

Novi poraz AAPL u UK!

Ovim tempom će brzo izgubiti u EU sve slučajeve. Još kad bi sudovi u Kaliforniji počeli raditi svoj posao...

Samsung Wins U.K. Apple Ruling Over ‘Not as Cool’ Galaxy Tab
By Kit Chellel - Jul 9, 2012 3:35 PM GMT+0200

Samsung Electronics Co. (005930) won a legal ruling after a U.K. judge said its Galaxy tablets aren’t “cool” enough to be confused with Apple Inc. (AAPL)’s iPad.

The design for three Galaxy tablets doesn’t infringe Apple’s registered design, Judge Colin Birss said today in London in a court fight between the world’s two biggest makers of smartphones. Consumers aren’t likely to get the tablet computers mixed up, he said.

The Galaxy tablets “do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design,” Birss said. “They are not as cool.”
...
Samsung asked the U.K. court to rule that its Galaxy tablets weren’t too similar to products created by the late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs and design chief Jonathan Ive, according to today’s judgment. Apple filed a counter-claim.

The judge found that Samsung’s products were distinctive because they were thinner and had “unusual details” on the back. He gave Apple 21 days to appeal.
...

Al' im je sudija Colin Birss spustio !

AAPL saopštenje:

“It’s no coincidence that Samsung’s latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad,” Apple spokesman Alan Hely said in an e-mailed statement that didn’t specifically address the ruling. “This kind of blatant copying is wrong and, as we’ve said many times before, we need to protect Apple’s intellectual property.”

Gori su od pokvarene ploče . Omiljeni izraz im je blatantno kopiranje, a ha ha ha .

DailyTech izveštaj:
http://www.dailytech.com/UK+Judge+Re...ticle25132.htm

II. UK Judge Rejects Design Infringement Claims
He writes, "[The Galaxy Tab line] do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design... They are not as cool."

Despite the kind words, the Judge says that 50+ examples of prior art both in the industry and in fictional works show that Apple's 2004 idea was hardly "original". The Judge considered it ludicrous that Samsung be expected to differentiate the front of its device, given that extra face buttons hinder the user interface and that the hardware form factor is almost entirely constrained by the multi-touch display, an industry standard.

Judge Birss says where tablets need to differentiate themselves is in the back face and profile. He found that "unusual details" on the back of the Samsung devices, as well as a thinner profile, made them trivially distinguishable from the iPad.

Ma nemoguće, a ha ha.

[zechs]

Pa to je onaj fazon..dovoljno dugo izgovorena laž, postaje istina. Ako apple jedno milion puta ponovi da ga kopira Samsung i krade mu patente, na kraju će im neko i poverovati..

[Emix]

Pa nekome ocigledno to smeta, ja ne mogu tu nista ali da kopira kopira, evo zna i moja baba.

[zechs]

http://www.androidpit.com/apple-pate...aign=NL_110712

The same judge who threw out Apple's injunction against Motorola has said he wonders whether patents should cover software or most any industries at all. Richard Posner, a judge who has been at it for over two decades, thinks that the constant "struggle for survival," leads tech companies into the courtroom when they should be coming up with the next innovative idea.

"As in any jungle, the animals will use all the means at their disposal, all their teeth and claws that are permitted by the ecosystem," Posner told Reuters. The judge blames the courts, not the companies, for the current patent mess we're in. Simply put, there are far too many patents needed to build a smartphone, which keeps the competition from really innovating. "You just have this proliferation of patents," Posner said. "It's a problem."

When Apple attempted to ban Motorola's phones because of an individual feature like streaming video, Posner spoke for many when he said Apple's patent "is not a claim to a monopoly of streaming video!" AKA, you can't bar an entire phone because of a single patent you have. We couldn't have said it better ourselves.

Seriously, can this guy preside over every patent trial from now on? We need a lot more of Posner's matter-of-fact logic over in Silicon Valley. While completely eliminating patents may seems ludicrous, perhaps it's the less ludicrous than the fact that Apple and Samsung have each spent tens of millions of dollars defending their innovations. Now just imagine trying to design the next great smartphone if you don't have all that cash around. It's impossible. Who knows; if it weren't for this whole circus, maybe we'd have bendable displays by now.

[alfaunits]

Pa nekome ocigledno to smeta, ja ne mogu tu nista ali da kopira kopira, evo zna i moja baba.

Ako ljudi ne vide prostu razliku u ceni i imenu... njima ne treba dati pravo glasa a kamoli pravo da se zale da li neko kopira dizajn iole