7 ms·

Apple should focus on competing on the quality of THEIR product. Not rely on lawyers and back room deals to cripple the competitions products. There doesn't se

by thechut 14y ago

Apple should focus on competing on the quality of THEIR product. Not rely on lawyers and back room deals to cripple the competitions products. There doesn't seem to be any information stating whether or not Apple made any attempt to tell retailers they could sell these products again after the injunction was lifted. This is as anti-competitive behavior at its worse. Before we know it Apple will have formed the OAAA (Only Apple Association of America) and be lobbying congress to force consumers to pay a fee just for owning non-Apple products.

einhverfr 14y ago
Just remember, patents are government-granted monopolies.
- thechut 14y ago
  Lets not get into a conversation about the state of software patents in this country, or the quality and breadth of Apple's patents. But I think it seems a bit unreasonable to ban the sale of an entire device which is based on hundreds if not thousands of patents just because it MIGHT (keep in mind this case was not won but Apple, this was a preliminary injunction) infringe on one or two software patents.
  - zoop 14y ago
    If you think you have a chance at winning a case about patents then not acting would be foolish. edit: My point is that this IS a conversation about software patents and competition and not whether or not you are I think this is reasonable. If the system is broken and you, as a multi-billion company, don't take that competitive advantage someone else will.
    - mkr-hn 14y ago
      Can we have a little break where people can make good products and compete fairly? Let's not be so eager to jump into the pit with another brutal monopoly. edit: "If I don't take advantage, someone else will" is also known as mutually assured destruction. I liked the patent cold war better than what we're seeing now. Companies should shelve the nukes and go back to vying for customers with merits, not missiles.
- guard-of-terra 14y ago
  So using them shows you have no balls to compete freely. The best patent is the one never enforced. "Apple should focus on competing on the quality of THEIR product" still stands.
  - taligent 14y ago
    I hope you are consistent with that belief. Because what Samsung is doing with its FRAND patents is 100x worse than what Apple is doing.
- wavephorm 14y ago
  And the government granted Kevin Rose the monopoly to vote on things.
seiji 14y ago
force consumers to pay a fee just for owning non-Apple products. People already pay a fee for owning non-Apple products. All the crashes, malware, borked phones, wireless never working quite right, external monitors never working quite right, and various circles of driver hell aren't free.
- mkr-hn 14y ago
  Nope. Everything's working fine on my Windows 7 laptop.
- rbanffy 14y ago
  I assume Microsoft's patent extortion is included in the price of my Android tablet... sigh...
  - mkr-hn 14y ago
    Licensing is a fair, non-monopolistic way to settle patent infringement. The fact that Android thrives despite the fee is proof of that. Microsoft is using the system as intended. The validity of the patent is another matter, but the companies paying the fee don't seem to be interested in settling it.
    - spinchange 14y ago
      >the companies paying the fee don't seem to be interested in settling it. I think most of the companies are not interested in a protracted legal battle with a partner many of them still rely on for licensing arrangements in other businesses. Microsoft is just playing "good cop" to Apple's existential "bad cop" threat. Doesn't mean they like paying tolls to Redmond.
      - mkr-hn 14y ago
        I'll take that over weaponized patents. Microsoft is showing restraint, even if it's only because of their mutual interest in knocking Apple down a peg. I'll criticize Microsoft as soon as they use those patents to block competitors.
mef 14y ago
I agree with you, but don't forget that Steve Jobs vowed to go "thermonuclear war" on Android. It seems the folks at Apple are determined to follow through on that promise and will use any and all (potentially nasty) measures to see Android fail.
Spooky23 14y ago
Sounds like free advertising for Samsung. If the products are good enough that Apple is playing dirty tricks to remove them to the market, maybe I need to reconsider buying a new iPhone when my contract runs out this fall.
- nessus42 14y ago
  I don't think that Apple is playing dirty tricks in this regard. I'm not particularly sympathetic to many kinds of patents that are being enforced these days, but Samsung is clearly trying to make slavish copies of Apple products, and Apple certainly is entitled to defend themselves against this. I might not have been so sympathetic to Apple in this regard if I hadn't been fooled by Samsung products myself. E.g., a few months back I was in a Costco and saw a new iPad on display. I found this surprising, as I wasn't aware that there was a new iPad. I picked up the iPad and fiddled with it for a minute. I found it confusing, because it was so much like the iPad I had at home, except that some things were different in a way that I didn't expect. After a minute, I finally realized that this wasn't an iPad at all, but rather a Samsung tablet that had been designed to mimic the iPad in many important details. I also recall seeing a TV show in which someone was speaking on an iPhone, only it wasn't any model of iPhone that I had seen before. I figured that it must have been a prop iPhone as perhaps Apple hadn't wanted to pay for the product placement in this episode. I vaguely recalled Apple suing Samsung over design patents and so I Googled for a minute. Sure enough, the "prop iPhone" was a real Samsung phone! You can't knock-off a Chanel handbag. Why should you be able to knock-off an iPad or an iPhone? Anyone who claims that Samsung isn't intentionally stealing Apple's design for their own profit is being disingenuous. And anyone who claims that Samsung couldn't easily differentiate their design from Apple's design is also be disingenuous. Other Android phones and tablets are not such slavish copies, and this is why Apple is going after Samsung, rather than other phone and tablet manufacturers.
  - ralfn 14y ago
    You seriously cant tell iOS and Android apart? Your statement feels like a work of fiction.
stcredzero 14y ago
Apple should focus on competing on the quality of THEIR product. The other day, I stuck a spare SIM into a 1st gen iPhone 8GB running iOS 3.1.2. Even on EDGE, the thing smokes my iPhone 3GS on iOS 5.1.1 bringing up the Maps program using 3G at the same location. It's positively slick, responsive, and just beautiful. Undoubtedly, there is a lot of bloat in both iOS and OS X now. My Macbook Pro running Lion is way slower than when it was running Snow Leopard, and the thing has an SSD! I've even disabled noatime and swap. That makes my machine faster, but it's still slower than it was.
- dclowd9901 14y ago
  It's crazy, isn't it? I don't think I'm ever going to "upgrade" the OS on my new iPhone. My iPhone 4 went from obscenely snappy to slow as my 3G when the 4 came out.
nessus42 14y ago
> Apple should focus on competing on the quality of THEIR product. Isn't the quality of Apple's design part of the quality of their product? If other companies can copy Apple's design, then other companies can just copy a significant part of Apple's quality without putting in any of the effort and cost that Apple put into their design. Okay, well, let's say for the point of argument is is morally okay for other companies to "borrow" Apple's design, and this is just tough luck for Apple. In that case, why not just let them "borrow" everything about Apple's products? I.e., why not let other companies just make perfect knock-offs down to the circuit board level? And while we're at it, they should just be able to copy Apple's software too? In that case, companies should compete on nothing other than their ability to manufacture commodities for as cheaply as possible. Personally, I find the attitude that design should be free, while everything else should be IP, to be highly insulting to design experts and their expertise.
- creamyhorror 14y ago
  > Okay, well, let's say for the point of argument is is morally okay for other companies to "borrow" Apple's design, and this is just tough luck for Apple. In that case, why not just let them "borrow" everything about Apple's products? If a competing product has particular features, I do think it should be permissible to re-create those features in your own product. That's the reason why many folks here are against software patents - because the idea behind a feature should not be protected if a competitor can produce the same effect with its own engineering. > In that case, why not just let them "borrow" everything about Apple's products? They can't, though, because they wouldn't have access to those aspects. Design and features are two things that are publicly exposed to the world, and personally I think you should be able to implement features your competitors have. Similarly, while I wouldn't copy a design wholesale, I don't think it should be wrong to take elements from others' designs.

by thechut 14y ago

einhverfr 14y ago

Just remember, patents are government-granted monopolies.

thechut 14y ago
Lets not get into a conversation about the state of software patents in this country, or the quality and breadth of Apple's patents. But I think it seems a bit unreasonable to ban the sale of an entire device which is based on hundreds if not thousands of patents just because it MIGHT (keep in mind this case was not won but Apple, this was a preliminary injunction) infringe on one or two software patents.
- zoop 14y ago
  If you think you have a chance at winning a case about patents then not acting would be foolish. edit: My point is that this IS a conversation about software patents and competition and not whether or not you are I think this is reasonable. If the system is broken and you, as a multi-billion company, don't take that competitive advantage someone else will.
  - mkr-hn 14y ago
    Can we have a little break where people can make good products and compete fairly? Let's not be so eager to jump into the pit with another brutal monopoly. edit: "If I don't take advantage, someone else will" is also known as mutually assured destruction. I liked the patent cold war better than what we're seeing now. Companies should shelve the nukes and go back to vying for customers with merits, not missiles.
guard-of-terra 14y ago
So using them shows you have no balls to compete freely. The best patent is the one never enforced. "Apple should focus on competing on the quality of THEIR product" still stands.
- taligent 14y ago
  I hope you are consistent with that belief. Because what Samsung is doing with its FRAND patents is 100x worse than what Apple is doing.
wavephorm 14y ago
And the government granted Kevin Rose the monopoly to vote on things.

seiji 14y ago

force consumers to pay a fee just for owning non-Apple products. People already pay a fee for owning non-Apple products. All the crashes, malware, borked phones, wireless never working quite right, external monitors never working quite right, and various circles of driver hell aren't free.

mkr-hn 14y ago
Nope. Everything's working fine on my Windows 7 laptop.
rbanffy 14y ago
I assume Microsoft's patent extortion is included in the price of my Android tablet... sigh...
- mkr-hn 14y ago
  Licensing is a fair, non-monopolistic way to settle patent infringement. The fact that Android thrives despite the fee is proof of that. Microsoft is using the system as intended. The validity of the patent is another matter, but the companies paying the fee don't seem to be interested in settling it.
  - spinchange 14y ago
    >the companies paying the fee don't seem to be interested in settling it. I think most of the companies are not interested in a protracted legal battle with a partner many of them still rely on for licensing arrangements in other businesses. Microsoft is just playing "good cop" to Apple's existential "bad cop" threat. Doesn't mean they like paying tolls to Redmond.
    - mkr-hn 14y ago
      I'll take that over weaponized patents. Microsoft is showing restraint, even if it's only because of their mutual interest in knocking Apple down a peg. I'll criticize Microsoft as soon as they use those patents to block competitors.

mef 14y ago

I agree with you, but don't forget that Steve Jobs vowed to go "thermonuclear war" on Android. It seems the folks at Apple are determined to follow through on that promise and will use any and all (potentially nasty) measures to see Android fail.

Spooky23 14y ago

Sounds like free advertising for Samsung. If the products are good enough that Apple is playing dirty tricks to remove them to the market, maybe I need to reconsider buying a new iPhone when my contract runs out this fall.

nessus42 14y ago
I don't think that Apple is playing dirty tricks in this regard. I'm not particularly sympathetic to many kinds of patents that are being enforced these days, but Samsung is clearly trying to make slavish copies of Apple products, and Apple certainly is entitled to defend themselves against this. I might not have been so sympathetic to Apple in this regard if I hadn't been fooled by Samsung products myself. E.g., a few months back I was in a Costco and saw a new iPad on display. I found this surprising, as I wasn't aware that there was a new iPad. I picked up the iPad and fiddled with it for a minute. I found it confusing, because it was so much like the iPad I had at home, except that some things were different in a way that I didn't expect. After a minute, I finally realized that this wasn't an iPad at all, but rather a Samsung tablet that had been designed to mimic the iPad in many important details. I also recall seeing a TV show in which someone was speaking on an iPhone, only it wasn't any model of iPhone that I had seen before. I figured that it must have been a prop iPhone as perhaps Apple hadn't wanted to pay for the product placement in this episode. I vaguely recalled Apple suing Samsung over design patents and so I Googled for a minute. Sure enough, the "prop iPhone" was a real Samsung phone! You can't knock-off a Chanel handbag. Why should you be able to knock-off an iPad or an iPhone? Anyone who claims that Samsung isn't intentionally stealing Apple's design for their own profit is being disingenuous. And anyone who claims that Samsung couldn't easily differentiate their design from Apple's design is also be disingenuous. Other Android phones and tablets are not such slavish copies, and this is why Apple is going after Samsung, rather than other phone and tablet manufacturers.
- ralfn 14y ago
  You seriously cant tell iOS and Android apart? Your statement feels like a work of fiction.

stcredzero 14y ago

Apple should focus on competing on the quality of THEIR product. The other day, I stuck a spare SIM into a 1st gen iPhone 8GB running iOS 3.1.2. Even on EDGE, the thing smokes my iPhone 3GS on iOS 5.1.1 bringing up the Maps program using 3G at the same location. It's positively slick, responsive, and just beautiful. Undoubtedly, there is a lot of bloat in both iOS and OS X now. My Macbook Pro running Lion is way slower than when it was running Snow Leopard, and the thing has an SSD! I've even disabled noatime and swap. That makes my machine faster, but it's still slower than it was.

dclowd9901 14y ago
It's crazy, isn't it? I don't think I'm ever going to "upgrade" the OS on my new iPhone. My iPhone 4 went from obscenely snappy to slow as my 3G when the 4 came out.

nessus42 14y ago

> Apple should focus on competing on the quality of THEIR product. Isn't the quality of Apple's design part of the quality of their product? If other companies can copy Apple's design, then other companies can just copy a significant part of Apple's quality without putting in any of the effort and cost that Apple put into their design. Okay, well, let's say for the point of argument is is morally okay for other companies to "borrow" Apple's design, and this is just tough luck for Apple. In that case, why not just let them "borrow" everything about Apple's products? I.e., why not let other companies just make perfect knock-offs down to the circuit board level? And while we're at it, they should just be able to copy Apple's software too? In that case, companies should compete on nothing other than their ability to manufacture commodities for as cheaply as possible. Personally, I find the attitude that design should be free, while everything else should be IP, to be highly insulting to design experts and their expertise.

creamyhorror 14y ago
> Okay, well, let's say for the point of argument is is morally okay for other companies to "borrow" Apple's design, and this is just tough luck for Apple. In that case, why not just let them "borrow" everything about Apple's products? If a competing product has particular features, I do think it should be permissible to re-create those features in your own product. That's the reason why many folks here are against software patents - because the idea behind a feature should not be protected if a competitor can produce the same effect with its own engineering. > In that case, why not just let them "borrow" everything about Apple's products? They can't, though, because they wouldn't have access to those aspects. Design and features are two things that are publicly exposed to the world, and personally I think you should be able to implement features your competitors have. Similarly, while I wouldn't copy a design wholesale, I don't think it should be wrong to take elements from others' designs.