nirvana

33 ms·

271.
by nirvana 14y ago
Except that the major parts- like a touch oriented UI- don't exist until Apple develops them. And having seen them, other companies can't replicate them well at all because they don't do the research. Calling them a lego assembler ignores a
272.
by nirvana 14y ago
> if it's not Linux or open source, it bad/wrong/etc. It's ideological. There is a trend in these objections in articles like this and across hacker news. They simply ignore what was unique about the iPhone and trivialize it completely
273.
by nirvana 14y ago
This is great news, as sailing is a wonderful sport, and the TV coverage of it in the past has often been hard to find, quite inconsistent and very poorly done. I don't know why WIRED is increasingly becoming such a snotty, hostile and tabl
274.
Radical new flat lens may dramatically improve cellphone cameras(sciencedaily.com)
2 points by nirvana 14y ago|0 comments
275.
by nirvana 14y ago
> I'll go out on a limb and guess It isn't on a limb to repeat the nonsensical accusations that your ideology has been spewing all over hacker news for the past four years (and everywhere else too.) Of course its also something that wou
276.
by nirvana 14y ago
Yes, tying the region of the account to the region of the credit card is a pretty damn flexible way to do it, given the movie and music companies are forcing them to tie their sales to regions. Much better than the IP address BS you see fro
277.
by nirvana 14y ago
I find your last line about forcing people to give you control hilarious since it comes after your (false) claims that another entity was taking control from you. Sounds like you got bit by an ideological bug more than anything else. I'm s
278.
by nirvana 14y ago
I travel full time, and have been living all over the world for the past four years and never had this problem. From Romania to Chile, Venice to England wherever I am, my iTunes works the way I'd expect. Compared to HULU and Netflix, Apple
279.
by nirvana 14y ago
Android fans like to talk about how much better their android is... it is the same phenomena you see with chevy vs ford. Only its like saying your yugo is better than my mercedes, when the difference in price is $100. It's silly.
280.
by nirvana 14y ago
You've been able to run Unix on Macs going back to the 1980s. In the 1990s there were several variations of Linux that ran on Macs, and Apple hired the mklinux guy to make sure that linux kernels ran ok on Macs. The only time in the Mac's
281.
by nirvana 14y ago
> Apple has a monopoly on legit iOS App distribution, I know why you think that, but you're missing that there is a completely legitimate app distribution mechanism outside the AppStore. You can install (and distribute) whatever apps yo
282.
by nirvana 14y ago
I'm sure they are rare among startup founders, but not rare in the wider realm. But it is not the fault of the patent system that people don't read them. I already mentioned one benefit that doesn't require reading the patents, and that is
283.
by nirvana 14y ago
The jury had 14 days of hearing evidence. It is quite possible that the case was so compelling that it didn't take them very long to decide the points. I've yet to see any argument that the verdict is wrong, based on an understanding of the
284.
by nirvana 14y ago
It is common for android fans on hacker news to assert that the patents are invalid because the same features exist in android phones, but this is not only a temporal error, but implied a lack of understanding of what patents even are. I've
285.
by nirvana 14y ago
They do grant a type of legal monopoly... but on an invention, not on a feature. So, in my example, Jeff Han demonstrated pinch to zoom using cameras photographing your hans, while Apple has a patent on an invention that lets a screen figu
286.
by nirvana 14y ago
You seem to imply you've read the patent. Could you find the specific claims and then show us some prior art for them? Many things become "obvious" after they have entered commercial production, but are not obvious at the time they are inv
287.
by nirvana 14y ago
Patents cover implementations, not features. These patents are not BS, they are legitimate. There are bigger patents that cover larger aspects of the iPhone inventions but those patents were filed later and thus not granted in time for th
288.
by nirvana 14y ago
>But it says something bad about where we're headed when "bouncing" scrolling, black rectangles, and pinching motions are considered legally protectable innovation. They aren't. You can't patent features. Jeff Han demonstrated pinch-t
289.
by nirvana 14y ago
I think this is actually bad news. Since the guy has a patent to his name, that means he understood what patents are. (EG: protection for unique inventions, not monopolies on features or ideas.) If the jury had been completely non-technica
290.
by nirvana 14y ago
Zuckerbergs attitude about this makes me think he's a terrible manager and probably not a very good programmer. I get that some people prefer to work together in a room, constantly interrupting each other. I don't understand why, but I res
291.
by nirvana 14y ago
You cannot implement "one-click" using "bog standard database and cookie techniques". Your idea of what this patent covers is incorrect. It is not a patent on the feature of "press a button to make a purchase and skip the checkout process"
292.
by nirvana 14y ago
There was nothing obvious about the iPhone, otherwise Apple's competitors, who had been in the phone industry for years, would have done it already. Hell, they and much of the "experts" spent the 6 months between announcement and shipping o
293.
by nirvana 14y ago
I did answer your question. Nobody can patent "pinch to zoom" such that nobody else can use it. The question comes from a misunderstanding of the situation and the patent. I've met this method of arguing before and consider it a trap. "I t
294.
by nirvana 14y ago
You're correct that economics is a science, but you make an error when you say "most of the evidence", and then link to an ideological position. Science doesn't work that way. Even if the preponderance of evidence were the standard, you ha
295.
by nirvana 14y ago
It is true, you're just simply being dishonest. You can download and install full javascript apps that run on the device. To call it "putting a web link on the screen" is a lie. After you installed the app, you can go into airplane mode,
296.
by nirvana 14y ago
You can't patent the feature "pinch-to-zoom" you can only patent an invention of a method to implement that feature. Thus, samsung could have implemented the feature if they had done it their own way. For example, Jeff Han demonstrated a s
297.
by nirvana 14y ago
Patents cover inventions of methods and processes to accomplish something-- implementations, not the idea or the feature. Thus pinch-to-zoom as Jeff Han demonstrated it, using cameras to take pictures of your hands is not the same thing as
298.
by nirvana 14y ago
Patents cover inventions of methods and processes to accomplish something-- implementations, not the idea or the feature. Thus pinch-to-zoom as Jeff demonstrated it, using cameras to take pictures of your hands is not the same thing as appl
299.
by nirvana 14y ago
I find this contradiction quite curious. I think it is because their position is ideological, not logical. Samwer is evil. Copying another startups look is evil. Google is good (remember their slogan: "Do no evil." how could they be evil
300.
by nirvana 14y ago
The patent doesn't cover the idea of using pinch to zoom. Patents are not on features or on ideas. They are on implementations. Thus someone else demoing pinch to zoom using a different implementation is completely irrelevant to this disc

More ›