backtop


Print 113 comment(s) - last by razkool88.. on Jul 25 at 11:25 AM


Eric Schmidt says Android's competitors are just jealous of its success and that their suits are meritless works of companies that can't innovate.  (Source: Reuters)

Apple hasn't released a new handset in over a year. Meanwhile it's filed multiple suits against Google.  (Source: Perth Now)
Schmidt says Steve Jobs and company are jealous of Android's success

Google Inc.'s (GOOG) former CEO Eric Schmidt had harsh words for rival Apple, Inc. (AAPL) on Tuesday.  Speaking at the Mobile Revolution conference in Tokyo, Mr. Schmidt let loose:
The big news in the past year has been the explosion of Google Android handsets and this means our competitors are responding. Because they are not responding with innovation, they’re responding with lawsuits. We have not done anything wrong and these lawsuits are just inspired by our success.
Apple, who hasn't released a new handset in over a year, is currently suing [1][2][3][4][5] the world's top three Android handset makers -- HTC Corp. (SEO:066570), Motorola Solutions Inc. (MSI) and Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (SEO:005930).  All three companies have responded back with countersuits [1][2][3], but already one of the companies looks to be in serious danger.  

 A U.S. International Trade Commission judge found that HTC's products violated two of Apple's broad technology patents.  The ruling opens the way for Apple to secure an injunction to block shipments of HTC products into the U.S.

Try as it might, Google was unable to successfully spin the news as a victory.  At the end of the day, the preliminary infringement ruling covered technology that's deeply tied to the Android operating system.

Google faces similar headaches from another rival, Microsoft Corp. (MSFT). HTC has agreed to pay Microsoft a reported $5 to $10 USD per handset.  Now Microsoft wants $15 per handset Samsung sells and is using the threat of a lawsuit to try to drive a deal.

The timing of these lawsuits hardly seems coincidental.  Microsoft's hopes for Windows Phone 7 have fallen flat as the OS has failed to generate any market momentum, thus far, and has only a tiny smart phone market share.  Similarly Apple, is getting outsold over two-to-one by Google.

While Apple and Microsoft are seemingly in violation of each others' patents, as well, the pair have focused their attention almost solely on targeting Google, the market leader.  And that, says Mr. Schmidt, boils down to pure jealously.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Sorry
By quiksilvr on 7/19/2011 1:08:08 PM , Rating: 5
Apple lost its innovation years ago. It all started when Sony beat Apple to the punch for LED backlit screen on its laptop.

Slowly but surely it got worse:
1) They were one of the last companies to had an HD webcam and dual microphones for noise cancelling.
2) Lack of IO and format support such as HDMI, USB 3.0, Blu Ray, and eSATA (not even their workstations have eSATA on it)
3) To this day no right click.
4) Heavier laptops than the competition.
5) Generations behind on processors for their lower end models (Macbook, Mac Mini)
6) Lackluster HDD options for their higher end notebooks (no 1TB options, no 7200rpm HDDs over 500GB)
7) No numberpad on their larger laptops
8) No widespread adoption of 16:9 screen format for their laptops (except the 11" Air)

I won't even get into their iPods because its such a horrible mess (except the Touch, which is getting replaced by the iPhone entirely)

It's obvious they get most of their money from the iPhone and iPad and they more or less neglected the laptop and desktop areas (Good enough seems to be the mentality).

But now that their precious phone and period clogger is getting threatened with little to fall back on, they are lashing out in the most childish way possible.


RE: Sorry
By Mitch101 on 7/19/11, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry
By Reclaimer77 on 7/19/2011 3:18:39 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Im going to back Apple (Hell just got few degrees colder) because I believe Google did violate a number of patents to produce a competing product.


If you read the wording of the patents then pretty much EVERY smart phone on the planet, and other devices, violate these "patents".

It would have been impossible to make a competing product without violating them. So Google did the best thing they could have done; ignored them.

Sorry but no patent gives Apple the right to exclusively provide a product this generic and vague and create a monopoly of an entire industry. Isn't that the sort of thing Mactards bash Microsoft for? But here you guys are, essentially saying, that only Apple should provide smart phones to the market.


RE: Sorry
By shock_and_awe on 7/19/11, Rating: 0
RE: Sorry
By Gio6518 on 7/19/11, Rating: 0
RE: Sorry
By shock_and_awe on 7/19/11, Rating: 0
RE: Sorry
By Gio6518 on 7/19/11, Rating: 0
RE: Sorry
By Gio6518 on 7/19/2011 2:07:33 PM , Rating: 5
i played games, listened to mp3's and video (divx), e-mail, text, read books, browse web on win mobile years before the iPhone came out...


RE: Sorry
By Solandri on 7/19/2011 8:20:27 PM , Rating: 3
"Picasso had a saying - 'Good artists copy, great artists steal." And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas." - Steve Jobs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU


RE: Sorry
By Cerin218 on 7/20/11, Rating: 0
RE: Sorry
By inperfectdarkness on 7/19/2011 3:40:34 PM , Rating: 3
hey now, 16x9 adoption can go f**k itself. i'll take 16x10 any day!


RE: Sorry
By adiposity on 7/19/2011 6:11:39 PM , Rating: 2
I'm just pissed that both exist in significant quantities. I love my 16:10 but I probably would have liked a 16:9 just fine when I got my first ultrasharp.

16:9 made sense for movies, kind of--it's based on expansion of the PAL standard. And 16:10 made sense for monitors, kind of--the closest rounds numbers to 16:9.


RE: Sorry
By inperfectdarkness on 7/20/2011 7:03:19 AM , Rating: 2
yet once again, the movie industry altered formats YET AGAIN. you STILL get letterboxing with 16x9 screens, and i'm not interested in a 2.39:1 laptop.

i say go back to 16x10 & screw worrying about letterboxing.


RE: Sorry
By omnicronx on 7/19/2011 5:12:43 PM , Rating: 2
I think its hard to say that Apple does not innovate (innovate does not imply you have to invent).

My problem with Apple is they will merely know when to bring something to mass market, and improve upon it, then go out and get patents even though even a small check by the patent office would have found some kind of prior art, or found the patents far too generic.

Not that all the big companies don't do it, its just Apple is now using it as a way to shut down competition. I would have no problem if the patents in question were truly Apple innovations, heck if they were patented with the intent to use them for a mobile device. Unfortunately neither of the above hold true, which is most likely why they continue to bring their cases to the ITC..


RE: Sorry
By redbone75 on 7/20/2011 12:32:21 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
then go out and get patents even though even a small check by the patent office would have found some kind of prior art, or found the patents far too generic

And therein lies the problem. I pose this: Do you think it's laziness on the part of the USPTO, or that Apple has deep enough pockets to "influence" the decision process?


RE: Sorry
By theapparition on 7/20/2011 9:17:40 AM , Rating: 2
The USPO only checks if there are other patents that predate the submission. They do not check if there is existing prior art that hasn't been submitted for patents. That is beyond thier scope.

They let the courts decide if the patent is enforceable.

Not a perfect system by any means, but I don't think the patent office would have the ability to research every single submission.

However, software and electronic patents like this are ridiculously generic in nature and the USPO should have a much higher bar for approval.


RE: Sorry
By knutjb on 7/20/2011 1:30:41 PM , Rating: 3
Aren't these the same arguments levied at Microsoft for years... I always heard from Apple followers that there, Apple's, superiority would never look like Microsoft.

Lets welcome Apple to the big leagues with the Feds crawling up through the backdoor for uncompetitive practices and the like just like IBM and Microsoft!


RE: Sorry
By tecknurd on 7/22/2011 6:20:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
3) To this day no right click.

Technically they do, hold down control and click or just buy your own two or three button mouse.

quote:
4) Heavier laptops than the competition.

Metal is heavy even air craft type aluminum. Try cracking it. Macbook uses plastic or polycarbonate plastic. Have you weigh it.

quote:
5) Generations behind on processors for their lower end models (Macbook, Mac Mini)

I am in the future and Apple just refreshed their Macbook Air and discontinued the Macbook. Now all their line except Mac Pro includes Thunderbolt, so eventually number 2 will be FUD. FYI, Mac OS X does not need the most powerful system to handle it.

quote:
6) Lackluster HDD options for their higher end notebooks (no 1TB options, no 7200rpm HDDs over 500GB)

More space like 750 GB or more requires more platters. More platters adds more heat because there is more force for the motor move the platters. Then there is the height issue. Probably there is no model that suits the height. A 1 terabyte of space is a lot.

quote:
7) No numberpad on their larger laptops

This I can not argue. It will be nice because it helps entering numbers into Excel for Mac. If Apple did put add a numpad, the buttons will be small.

The speakers are at the wrong area for good sound dispersing. The speakers should be at the edge and at the bottom shooting at an angle. Speakers for notebooks should be at the same thinking like it is in car audio where the speakers should be in the dash reflecting off the wind shield.

quote:
8) No widespread adoption of 16:9 screen format for their laptops (except the 11" Air)

This is completely a fuddrucker. You have been brain washed from marketing speak. For a desktop or notebook computer consumers should know that a 16:10 is more effective for workspace compared to 16:9. The 16:10 help compensate for the dock or task bar that takes up space. Also the title bar. Marketing thinks 16:9 helps with sales. If you think 16:9 helps with movies, then you are wrong. Movies are in a 2.65 ratio or 53:20. I agree with Apple is to stick with 16:10.


RE: Sorry
By Totally on 7/23/2011 1:10:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I am in the future and Apple just refreshed their Macbook Air and discontinued the Macbook. Now all their line except Mac Pro includes Thunderbolt, so eventually number 2 will be FUD. FYI, Mac OS X does not need the most powerful system to handle it.


That is BS, only if OSX was the only thing they were running. I have a friend time to time bugs me on how to upgrade his macbook b/c all the games he plays are really laggy, they didn't on his old laptop.

quote:
This is completely a fuddrucker. You have been brain washed from marketing speak. For a desktop or notebook computer consumers should know that a 16:10 is more effective for workspace compared to 16:9. The 16:10 help compensate for the dock or task bar that takes up space. Also the title bar. Marketing thinks 16:9 helps with sales. If you think 16:9 helps with movies, then you are wrong. Movies are in a 2.65 ratio or 53:20. I agree with Apple is to stick with 16:10.


I completely agree, 16:9 is for televisons, whose sole function is display movies and shows for you to watch. The value of the extra vertical pixels far outweighs not having the little black bars on the top and bottom of the screen during movie playback.


RE: Sorry
By tecknurd on 7/25/2011 6:09:23 AM , Rating: 2
My facts are true that Mac OS X does not need the most powerful computer to handle. All you did is rant that a Macbook can not handle games. That is a different topic, so the problem could be an over heat issue.


"Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" -- Homer Simpson














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki