4 ms·
Well, while they might seem that way because they are a hardware company, they are incredibly aggressive in that arena. Take the bannings and attempted banning
by tedsuo 14y ago
Well, while they might seem that way because they are a hardware company, they are incredibly aggressive in that arena. Take the bannings and attempted bannings of Motorola, HTC, and Samsung devices for example. They are definitely trying everything they can to prevent you from buying someone else's product.
- keithnoizu 14y agoExactly. Apple as great as their products are, have started to resurrect the look/feel lawsuits of the 90s with their patents on trivial things such as how to unlock a phone, having a jump bar, etc.
- jasomill 14y agoSure, but only because they apparently don't have enough non-bullshit, non-FRAND patents with which to play the "IP litigation counter-counter-...-counter strike" game. Apple sucks, but so does every other major player in the "mobile" industry. I could be wrong here, but no counterexamples come to mind.
- taligent 14y agoCan we stop this ridiculous revisionist history. Slide to unlock was not a common place feature before it came out on the iPhone despite the prevalence of touch screen devices. It is hard to argue against the fact that the implementation was indeed unique at the time.
- fpgeek 14y agoIf you're going to defend Apple, may I suggest that you at least pick ground that is less shaky than slide-to-unlock? I can say just one thing and clearly demonstrate that it is your history that is revisionist: Neonode N1m
- kimmel 14y agoStar Trek had slide to unlock before Apple even made a phone. Star Trek PAD versus the iPad... hmmm
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- flyinRyan 14y agoNo, they're trying to stop devices they see as copies from entering the market place. They have no way of stopping competing but different things from entering the market. MS did and used it.