Print 79 comment(s) - last by rburnham.. on Feb 22 at 2:51 PM

  (Source: MemeCenter)
The patents present four (somewhat) novel forms of unlock that range from simple to complex

The "Big Three" of the Android world -- HTC Corp. (TPE:2498), Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KS:005930), and Google Inc.'s (GOOG) nearly-acquired subsidiary-to-be Motorola Mobility -- all share a common legal adversary -- Apple, Inc. (AAPL).  Apple has asserted a slew of claims against the Android phonemakers, and they haven't been shy about firing back, sometimes quite successfully (other times not so much).

I. The Backup Plan

One of Apple's biggest successes, however, came when it scored a German injunction on Motorola's smartphones, thanks to its unlocking patents.  Apple's earliest anti-Android lawsuit against HTC also used the first of Apple's two unlocking patents, and multiple internation suits against Samsung have applied it, as well.

The German court did crucially rule that the circular unlock on the Motorola Xoom tablet was not in violation.  Unfortunately, it did not rule about the grid pattern unlock (to this author's knowledge).

To cut to the chase, it is my informed opinion that Apple's unlocking patents are likely invalid or should be narrowed, due to prior art.  But that process will take time.  And Google can't afford its partners to be temporarily removed in such a competitive market.  So that's why a new unlocking claim -- first dug up by the IP experts Patently Apple -- is so important.

Google already has filed a patent for the rights to the aforementioned grid-based unlock (U.S. Patent Application No. 20110283241 A1), but it likely will not receive this patent until 2013, at the earliest.

 Grid unlock
[Image Source: USPTO]

Assuming the worst case scenario -- that some regions choose not to invalidate or narrow Apple's broad ownership claims to an unsecured lock, Google would be in a bind.  And if, worse yet, some region decided Apple's patent so broad as to cover Google's grid unlock, it would be in really deep trouble.  In short, Google expects to win, but it has far too much to lose and needs a backup plan.  

That backup plan may be U.S. Patent Application 20120036556 A1, filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on Feb. 9, 2012.

II. Three Different Unlocking Techniques in One Patent (Plus Voice Support)

This method of unlock offers an easier, lower security novel unlock, should the user want one.  In its most simple method, the unlock involves simply scrolling through a side-scrolling list of commands, and then dragging one to an unlock "bin".
Method 1, Unlock
[Image Source: USPTO]
The action not only unlocks the screen in a method different from Apple, et al.'s method, but it also conveniently launches the task you want.  A downside is that it may be a bit slower to scroll and find your desired action, rather than Apple's directly unlock, followed by a full-screen delve for the desired app.  However, this could be mitigated if Google implements allows Android users to create their own list order (which would allow commonly used functions to be placed earlier.  The patent suggests such a streamlined implementation, both verbally and visually.

The second method offers slightly more security, and again a novel solution, albeit a less secured one than the grid unlock.  In the second method a series of common actions are displayed on a grid.  One action is the special user-designated "unlock" icon.  While it'd be easy to determine this by brute force (hence the security is limited), the experienced user can drag their desired action icon to the unlock icon and then back to initial location to unlock the screen in a novel way.  Doing so also launches the target app, as with the first method.

Unlock method 2
[Image Source: USPTO]

Users can either start with the unlock icon and drag it to the desired action, then back to the unlocked icons position; or start with the desired action icon and drag it to the unlock icon, then back to  desired actions original position.  Either way, the special designated unlock icon has to be part of the three-step drag sequence.

This process can also be accomplished via a redundant voice command.  This offers slightly more security, given that users could reverse engineer the unlock icon via "reverse engineering" fingerprint smudging (a similar concern has been raised about the grid unlock).

Finally the second unlocking patent offers a third unlocking mechanism -- a plain password driven method, with plain voice entry.

Unlock patent application 3
[Image Source: USPTO]

Google also has yet another method of unlocking -- Ice Cream Sandwich's facial recognition unlock, but the biometrics involved have shown to be weak, capable of being defeated by a picture of the phone's normal user, via methods we've covered in the past.  

The technology was already patented by Pitt Patt -- U.S. Patent 7,881,505.  Google owns this patent, now via its acquisition of the firm.  Both Google and Apple (as well as research institutions) have filed for patents on how to improve the facial recognition method, making it more robust and resistant to image spoofing.

Similar patents to the two new American filings, have likely been filed overseas in various jurisdictions.

Sources: USPTO [1], [2], [3], Patently Apple

Comments     Threshold

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

Nice T-Shirt image
By grbg on 2/19/2012 8:48:09 AM , Rating: 5

RE: Nice T-Shirt image
By The Raven on 2/20/2012 12:38:18 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah, when is Apple going to 'invent' the dual handprint identification unlock method?

RE: Nice T-Shirt image
By The Raven on 2/20/2012 12:43:12 PM , Rating: 2
Oh and I was thinking Spaceballs x2, but this one would also be acceptable...

RE: Nice T-Shirt image
By rburnham on 2/22/2012 2:51:47 PM , Rating: 2
Now that's how you up your readership.

This is all ridiculous
By tayb on 2/20/2012 9:37:44 AM , Rating: 2
Google shouldn't have these patents any more than Apple should have these patents. My biggest question on this is how will Google use these patents to help out its partners? I'm sure you've noticed that Apple hasn't sued Google because Google doesn't sell anything. Will Google simply give these patents away to its partners or will it simply use them to defend newly acquired Motorola and leave other partners hanging out to dry.

The latter is a scary scenario for partners such as Samsung and HTC and is a primary reason why I believed the Motorola acquisition was a mistake. You shouldn't compete with your partners and you definitely shouldn't provide your own offering with a competitive advantage that isn't available to your partners. I guess in the end companies such as Samsung or HTC don't have a choice except to focus more on WP7? Curious.

My prediction that Android will not exist in 5-7 years remains.

RE: This is all ridiculous
By Mels on 2/20/2012 10:39:38 AM , Rating: 2
My prediction that in 5-7 years you will continue to make minimum wage remains.

RE: This is all ridiculous
By tayb on 2/20/2012 5:15:28 PM , Rating: 4
Ouch. You hurt me deep. So deep.

Next time go for the neck! Crack a mom joke!

RE: This is all ridiculous
By theArchMichael on 2/21/2012 9:59:03 AM , Rating: 2
Google shouldn't have these patents any more than Apple should have these patents.

This part should still be true. Just what kind of operation is the patent office running over there that they are patenting such obvious and ubiquitous features.

By Ditchy412-l on 2/20/2012 11:43:03 AM , Rating: 3
I think comparing this technology with music is a little flawed. While the popularity and reactions do follow a similar trend music cannot be judged in any meaningful qualitative or quantitative way. It is a subject with absolutely no right answers as it is so subjective. However saying that a company like Apple is a technological innovator is categorically incorrect. They simply put their brand on existing technology. Their components are the same as go in other manufacturers machines. It's all written in the same basic language and they all include the same features.

Personally I would equate Apples patent wars as like Ralph Lauren claiming they invented the T-shirt because they added a logo and a pocket to the existing design although you can only buy it in one size and 2 colours.

By masamasa on 2/20/2012 4:28:16 PM , Rating: 2
If they worst issuing what are clearly ridiculous patents on very common technology the courts would not be dealing with all of this crap. The patent office is a sham.

Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By Jeremiah Derringer on 2/17/12, Rating: -1
RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By boobo on 2/17/2012 11:55:14 PM , Rating: 5
Use their technology? What technology?! They are fighting patent wars over concepts like "minimalistic design", black rectangular devices of any size and/or proportions, the use of grids...

That's NOT technology! That's not what patents are for.

If Motorola had patented the revolutionary technological innovation of putting the cell phone on your ear to listen, then Apple would have come up with a much more creative way to listen to your calls? Why did Apple steal that idea instead of doing something creative like holding the cell phone with your elbows and listening with your feet? Maybe because obvious stuff that is shaped around the the way the real world works shouldn't be locked exclusively to one vendor?

RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By V-Money on 2/18/2012 1:28:53 AM , Rating: 5
Apple's patents aren't broad or vague.

D618,677, D593,087 and D504,899, I would love to see how you can claim these patents as apple uses them in their lawsuits are not broad or vague.
Apple's products are simply so innovative and intuitive that everyone copies them, and that gives people like you the impression that they are generic and obvious.

...Or maybe other companies come up with the ideas first and Apple just happens to be the first to be widely recognized. Feel free to post a list of Apple's truly innovative ideas and I'll gladly give you examples of prior art or previously implemented technology (assuming I care enough to read your response).

Apple is single-handedly shaping and controlling technology and you don't even realize it.

Single handedly, that's a pretty bold claim for anyone. But I guess that explains how they designed their revolutionary, completely original, never before seen notification bar in iOS 5...I would leave that as a rhetoric but you seem like a simplistic idiot, so I'll explain to you that I am mocking you so that you don't mistakenly think I am agreeing with you.

Also, as a side note, everyone on this site knows how Apple stock is doing. That is completely irrelevant to this argument. That would be like me saying that since I drive a V-series Cadillac coupe(which I assume is much better than what you drive since you are clearly a douche)that I am better than you by default.

RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By V-Money on 2/18/2012 12:51:06 PM , Rating: 5
It's proof that consumers appreciate Apple's dedication to innovation and user-friendly technology.

...Because people never buy something because its shiny and gives you the perception of being cool or popular...

while people are just buying Android phones because they're cheaply made and low-priced.

Which proves your ignorance even more, android phones meet all levels of smartphones, from ultra cheap to ultra premium. Its called options and flexibility. I bought a premium android smartphone, others chose to buy cheap, but that was their choice. For instance, if I want a different sized phone, either bigger or smaller, I can get one. If I want a phone with a physical keypad, I can get one. You are pretty much stuck with what you have because there are no real options.

RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By Dorkyman on 2/18/2012 7:56:29 PM , Rating: 4
Jeremiah, please, I can't take any more of this.

I worked for Apple for four years back in the early days of Mac, and am very familiar with the company's philosophy.

Jobs had vision and a determination to follow through. But the Lisa and Mac were not unique; they followed the Xerox Star and Alto systems. What made Mac successful was the price point and cool factor.

Apple utterly failed to become the dominant player in the personal computer space because Jobs refused to license the OS to others and because, eventually, CPUs became powerful enough to run Mac-like software on a DOS base. Many of us in the company saw it coming, but talking to Jobs was like talking to a brick wall.

Now Apple is desperately trying to plug the holes in the smartphone dike by throwing absurd patents at the competition. History is repeating itself.

I carry an HTC phone. It is wonderful. Big screen, powerful, large universe of apps, I can trivially swap batteries, and you don't lose signal strength by gripping it a certain way. I don't need Apple acting like Big Brother telling me what I can and can't do with my phone.

So please try to be a bit more objective.

By spread on 2/19/2012 12:04:30 AM , Rating: 3
Apple is worth more than Google and Microsoft combined.

That's what the market valuation is at. That is not the true value of a company, that is the perceived value. People love Apple stock, because of that, price goes up.

Let's not get into financial discussions you know nothing about.

Anyways, how much are you getting paid for this? You realize you're completely worthless and your efforts here are in vain. Even the fanboys here won't agree. You're just making them angry and turning on Apple. Easiest way to make someone hate you is to annoy, like a desperate parter looking for attention. "When are you home? Are you ok? You didn't show up on time, it's been 5 minutes. You better get home. OMG, are you home yet? Did you car break down?"

And so on...

You desperate chump. I know this will fall on deaf ears since you're not very intelligent. I guess the world does need dumb people to perform meaningless functions requiring little thought or skill.

Hang around and piss off everyone. See what that accomplishes. Trick comment that you're not smart enough to figure out. I can explain it to you if you like.

: )

By poi2 on 2/19/2012 3:46:05 PM , Rating: 1
by Jeremiah Derringer on February 18, 2012 at 10:37 PM Apple is worth more than Google and Microsoft combined. Did you have a point?

Steve Job is not an APPL CEO anymore.

By spread on 2/18/2012 8:34:38 PM , Rating: 2
I'd like to see you reply to the guy who worked for Apple and who disagrees with you. Do you think you know more than an Apple employee involved in the situations you claim to know about? Let's find out how powerful your dementia is and whether reality can break through it.

You fanboys are whack.

RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By retrospooty on 2/18/2012 1:01:54 PM , Rating: 5
"people are just buying Android phones because they're cheaply made and low-priced."

I am pretty sure anyone that bought the Galaxy S2 isnt thinking that. Larger screen, higher res, faster CPU, OLED LCD, 4G. Its a freegin beast of a phone. All that and Android 4 rocks. Make IOS look like its standing still in the UI category. Old and ugly looking.

RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By testerguy on 2/20/12, Rating: -1
RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By Solandri on 2/20/2012 7:10:03 AM , Rating: 4
Larger screen is a disadvantage for some.

Likewise a smaller screen is a disadvantage for some.

Higher resolution isn't true - the iPhone 4 and 4S are higher.

No, the iPhone 4 and 4S have the highest pixel density. They do not have the highest resolution. 960x640 vs. 1280x720.

Faster CPU isn't true either - don't mistake clock speed for CPU performance.

The iPhone was at the top in CPU benchmarks when it was released. But the CPUs in the newest Android phones beat out the iPhone 4/4S. It's only in GPU performance where the iPhone remains ahead.

OLED LCD has advantages and disadvantages, viewing angles are worse for a start.

OLED is not an LCD. There is no polarizing filter to cut transmitted light like in an LCD, consequently there is no natural limitation of viewing angles. You have to get very close to viewing the screen edge-on before color starts to fade. Light falloff starts earlier, but you want that in any display outside of a movie theater. You want most of the light (and thus battery usage) being sent straight ahead where the viewer is most likely to be.

The biggest disadvantage I've found is lack of color accuracy because Samsung tries to make colors so saturated. But that'd be simple to fix with a mobile OS which allowed color profiles.

I do a lot of photo work which requires a wide color gamut and accuracy. I would kill for a large OLED monitor. I like many of the features I'm seeing on non-Samsung phones, but I'm really, really reluctant to give up the AMOLED. It is that good.

If you think that Android isn't competing mainly due to price, you're kidding yourself. That isn't to say that some people prefer a larger screen, or that some small minority in the world can benefit from 4G - it's just that MOST of the people who buy Android phones, IMO, do so because it's cheaper.

This used to be true, but not anymore. The iPhone 3GS is now free with contract, just like the free Android phones. T-Mobile was even giving the iPhone 4G for free (with contract) last weekend. So both iOS and Android are now competing across all price points, including free.

The rest of your stuff I don't really have a problem with. By no means do I think Android is perfect. The freezing/crashing issue is a bit exaggerated - I only had about one freeze/reboot a month during the ~10 months before I switched to a development build.

By retrospooty on 2/20/2012 7:33:46 AM , Rating: 2
"If you think that Android isn't competing mainly due to price, you're kidding yourself."

"Android is well known for freezing, rebooting, crashing"

I think the Android he is talking about is the one from 2 years ago.

TG - wake up and smell the 2012. Android has matched and now surpassed IOS. The only argument you have is that the upgrade path isnt solid. Well, if you buy a phone now for an OS that may or may not come in 1 1/2 years, then you haev issues. Like most people I buy a phone today for features it has today and iPhone is lacking.

By bupkus on 2/18/2012 2:40:50 AM , Rating: 2
I just can't wait until Apple develops a brilliant new interface for a back scratcher. It should involve a handle, an extension and a scratching surface thingy at the end and be protected by many descriptive patents. Of course they can name it the iScratch.

RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By themaster08 on 2/18/2012 3:43:15 AM , Rating: 4
Ignore this fool. His intention is obviously to try and wind people up. His utmost irrational views make for bitter, pointless debate.

"It doesn't matter that Apple has taken some of its cues from others. Apple are the best, and no amount of truth will change my view"

That's all you ever need to say, sir.

By V-Money on 2/18/2012 12:59:17 PM , Rating: 2
Well of course, but I'd like to see if I can figure out who he really is, I still haven't seen Tony Swash on this thread yet.

By drycrust3 on 2/19/2012 5:36:05 AM , Rating: 1
Apple's products are simply so innovative and intuitive that everyone copies them

If you bothered to read Apple's patents, you would see citations of patents that are broadly similar. So would you be surprised if someone could dig up US patents that cover much more specifically the same thing? I'm no patent expert, but with just a few hours to spare I found at least one US patent that was issued prior to Apple's patent applications yet, the technical language differences considered, looks pretty similar to what Apple claim was their own original work.
Quoting from the Apple patent (filed December 2005): "A device with a touch-sensitive display may be unlocked via gestures performed on the touch-sensitive display."
Now quoting from US 2002/0109677 :
"A touchpad... wherein movement of a user's finger on the surface of the touchpad ... and the movement of a specific pattern of a finger ... that will generate characters that are transmitted from the touchpad to a receiving device. A small number of movements of a finger across the touchpad are thus capable of generating a large number of characters for use in a password or code and thereby take advantage of the security benefits that can be achieved but without having to memorize the exact password but only a few movements of a finger or stylus."
Sure, this is long winded, but there is a lot of similarity between this and what Apple's patents cover. So the question then becomes: Would Apple have got their patent if they had cited this patent? To me, and I'm no patent expert, I would say "uncertain".

RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By testerguy on 2/18/12, Rating: -1
RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/18/2012 10:42:06 AM , Rating: 2
so was in effect a copy
Except, it really wasn't and anyone with half a brain, not you, realizes this.

RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By Solandri on 2/20/2012 5:57:14 AM , Rating: 3
The funny thing is, when Samsung updated the Galaxy Tab so it went from being thicker than the iPad 2 to thinner, Apple fans cited that as evidence of Samsung copying Apple.

When Apple updates the iPad so that its screen goes from being lower resolution than the Galaxy Tab to higher resolution, are these same people going to acknowledge that to be evidence of Apple copying Samsung and other Android tablet makers?

By Cheesew1z69 on 2/20/2012 1:09:33 PM , Rating: 2
No, they will claim the others copied Apple, it's par for the course.

RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By omnicronx on 2/18/2012 8:26:09 PM , Rating: 2
The reason the Galaxy got banned was that it was simply TOO similar to the iPad, overall, so was in effect a copy
It was a design patent dispute, what on earth do you think that means? Apple patented a rectangle with a minimalistic design in Germany.

i.e you are very much so wrong.

In the states Apple tried something similar in the US and were flat out denied by a judge who appears to actually have some common sense

RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By testerguy on 2/20/12, Rating: 0
By Solandri on 2/20/2012 6:13:15 AM , Rating: 4
The role of the courts is to clarify ambiguities in the law.

The Galaxy Tab 10.1 and 10.1N look so similar that for all intents and purposes it's impossible to tell from the two court decisions what exactly is considered infringing and what is not. The judges also refused to elucidate the exact reasons why one is considered infringing and the other is not, simply stating that the 10.1N is sufficiently different. Nothing was clarified.

Consequently, the German courts failed in their duty under the law. The most logical conclusion then is that the judges felt the decision in the 10.1 case was wrong, and they fixed it in the 10.1N case while avoiding the embarrassment of admitting that the first court screwed up.

Incidentally, the reason Apple was denied an injunction against sales of the 10.1 in the U.S. was because U.S. design patents must be completely ornamental. The judge felt the elements Apple was claiming ownership of (rounded corners, flat surface, rectangular shape, bezel) were most likely functional rather than ornamental.

By Cheesew1z69 on 2/20/2012 12:36:51 PM , Rating: 2
Anyone with 'common sense'
Most certainly not you as proven.

RE: Apple's lawsuits have helped consumers.
By Motoman on 2/18/2012 9:42:54 AM , Rating: 3
As if anyone needs any more proof that Apple consumers live in a reality distortion field.

The morons posting on this article trying to defend Apple patents have having the slightest legitimacy are examples of exactly how utterly useless a human being can be. You'd not be a bigger fool by going on a campaign insisting that the Earth is, indeed, flat, and everyone who thinks it's round is wrong.

All Apple consumers are like these people to a given degree, as it requires a fundamental break from reality to make a choice to purchase such devices anyway. The Apple propaganda machine takes advantage of these weak-minded people who are yearning to find a way to define themselves by purchasing a personality and joining a hive mind so they don't have to be burdened by thinking for themselves.

By Ghost42 on 2/18/2012 12:57:21 PM , Rating: 3
So what you're trying to say is that crApple's products are so simple that nothing can go wrong with them, or that if anything does that the end user will easily be able to fix it on their own devices without the need for an "geek/IT grunt" to fix it for them..

So my question then is.. When is crApple going to back up this claim of yours by getting rid of their "Genius Bar" since they obviously don't need anyone to fix their products?

By weskurtz0081 on 2/18/2012 2:15:12 PM , Rating: 4
So instead they run to a genius? Do you think Apple products don't have problems? I know people with iDevices that have problems all that time that "geeks" fix for them, no different than other products.

By nolisi on 2/18/2012 7:38:33 PM , Rating: 1
This is how the patent system was intended to work. If Apple took a more Communist approach to IP, like Google does, they would have simply allowed others to use their technology for free, and there would be fewer choices.

Apple's lawsuit created fewer choices, not more. Suppose I wanted to choose a Google phone with a slide to unlock- I no longer can due to this lawsuit.

These other solutions already existed with Google- pattern unlock and unlock to specific applications. These solutions simply existed because entites like HTC, Motorola and Samsung, or third party independent developers, took Googles free IP and developed those solutions already. Google is taking these ideas, cleaning them up to make them part of the "Google Experience", and integrating them into Android rather than have them be a third party UI App.

Google's opensource/communist approach gave birth to these solutions prior to the lawsuits. Google is just now patenting them and standardizing them for Android.

And why is Google now patenting them? So that Apple can't steal the patent out from under them like so many of the ideas that Apple's patents cover.

The one thing you cannot disprove or refute is that *ALL* of Apples ideas came from somewhere else. Name any idea that Apple had for its smartphones, and I'll show you prior art (Siri and OTA updates are just two of the items that Apple kindly stole from Google :-P).

By palladium on 2/18/2012 10:25:05 PM , Rating: 1
Are you reader1?

Apple's is better.
By Jeremiah Derringer on 2/17/12, Rating: -1
By Jeremiah Derringer on 2/17/12, Rating: -1
RE: Garbage
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/17/2012 11:21:58 PM , Rating: 3
No post's until today, who are you? Pirks? MacDev? Tony? Which one?

RE: Garbage
By sprockkets on 2/18/2012 12:19:34 AM , Rating: 5
Maybe reader1, but since this dumb ass hasn't mentioned anything about vertical markets (that I've seen), probably macdevdude.

RE: Garbage
By BugblatterIII on 2/18/2012 7:20:04 AM , Rating: 3
Or Steve Jobs has found a way to post from the Great Beyond...

RE: Garbage
By Alexvrb on 2/19/2012 1:29:33 AM , Rating: 2
Say what you will but (glaring flaws aside) Steve Jobs was fairly intelligent. Plus he was the one DOING the brainwashing, this one is obviously brainwashed himself.

RE: Garbage
By V-Money on 2/18/2012 1:23:59 PM , Rating: 2
Well, his ip address is located in Richmond Washington, and there is no name associated with his email account or any other instances of it on the web, so its obviously a fake account, but who could it be?

RE: Garbage
By spread on 2/18/2012 8:37:44 PM , Rating: 3
I'm going with Tony Swash on this one. The names are similar in style and so is the writing style.

Crazy old man indeed. Dude claimed that Apple "saved him" with their products from a life of monotony. How pathetic is your life when a shiny plastic toy improves it so much?

RE: Garbage
By Camikazi on 2/19/2012 2:02:52 AM , Rating: 2
Funny how Apple and their very similar design lines saved them from monotony... Apple is trying to make OSX and iOS one OS, meaning they will all be identical, then the iPods, iPhones and iPads are all the same basic design, how that saves you from monotony I don't know.

RE: Garbage
By TakinYourPoints on 2/19/12, Rating: 0
RE: Garbage
By TakinYourPoints on 2/18/12, Rating: 0
RE: Garbage
By FaceMaster on 2/18/2012 7:05:59 AM , Rating: 2
It's okay, we can troll him by breaking his -1 comment spree... by simply ignoring him.


RE: Garbage
By TSS on 2/18/12, Rating: -1
RE: Garbage
By retrospooty on 2/18/2012 7:55:03 AM , Rating: 2
Now Jerimiah, if your pro Apple spam is being knocked by one of our resident Apple fans, you know you have issues. Takinyourpoints at least uses some decent arguments and reasoning. You are just trolling. An obvious ID just created to spout your pro Apple nonsense.

RE: Garbage
By Jeremiah Derringer on 2/18/12, Rating: -1
RE: Garbage
By weskurtz0081 on 2/18/2012 3:33:44 PM , Rating: 1
It's actually kind of funny. The US government said they were going to take over oil companies because they were making too much money, about a 10% margin, but Apple makes a 30% margin and not a word... just an observation that's all.

RE: Garbage
By Jeremiah Derringer on 2/18/12, Rating: -1
RE: Garbage
By retrospooty on 2/18/2012 6:57:48 PM , Rating: 2
Golly gee wow, Apple sure is amazing. I think I will start identifying myself with them so I feel better about myself. Maybe I'll even create an inline ID, just to log in and post ignorant comments about them. I love them so much, I feel the need to troll for them. Thank you Apple for giving meaning to my otherwise empty life.

RE: Garbage
By spread on 2/18/2012 8:40:50 PM , Rating: 3
Thank you Apple for giving meaning to my otherwise empty life.

You are welcome random customer. Now please leave our store you are loitering and annoying our staff. Don't forget to buy something on the way out. We'll give you no discount.

RE: Garbage
By weskurtz0081 on 2/19/2012 9:04:14 AM , Rating: 1
Where did you get those numbers? Is that a net or a gross?

Hard to believe Apple and Google are that close together profit margin wise when Apple has such a higher gross (about 70%) on the latest iPhone.

RE: Garbage
By TakinYourPoints on 2/18/12, Rating: 0
RE: Garbage
By CList on 2/18/2012 8:48:36 AM , Rating: 5
It's funny how much these comments echo the debate my wife and I have on a recurring basis, though ours is usually focused on entertainment. It goes something like this...

I say:
"'Party Rock in the House Tonight' is such an annoying piece of crap song"

Then my wife says;
"are you kidding?? It's one of the most popular songs in WORLD right now, even if you don't like it, you have to admit that it's good because it's so popular".

To which I reply:
"It's a derivative piece of over-produced poop, and if most people had been paying any attention to either good progressive hip-hop or good progressive techno, they would know that"

Then my wife says:
"you're a self-righteous know-it-all who has no concept of how popular culture works. Most people don't want to know or care one bit about the history of anything; they just want to be entertained by simple fun stuff, and the people who understand and take advantage of that should be able to make loads of money off of it"
(my wife works in fashion so.... yeah there you go...)

...and I reply:
"Well, first, I know that's how the world works, but it annoys the hell out of me, and I think anyone who plays along with it should be ashamed of themselves. Second, I know there are people who take advantage of people's mindless-sheep-mentality but actually THINK they're doing something new and creative and they're the worst of all. Scratch the surface and you often find that in fact their main focus is just to make as much money as they can by producing junk that looks or sounds pretty, and then marketing the crap out of it."

And my wife says:
"Great, they make money and people are happy, what's the problem old man?"

And I really have no reply, but I still feel like the world is letting me down because she's reminded me that the "vote for who's coolest and not for who's best" rule applies just as much to grown-ups as it does to high-school students, and so I say:
"You should move to LA"

RE: Garbage
By Alexvrb on 2/19/2012 1:35:39 AM , Rating: 2
For some reason, I feel like you've made this thread worth reading.

RE: Garbage
By testerguy on 2/20/2012 5:58:35 AM , Rating: 1
Sorry Clist, but I'm with your wife on this one.

To describe people as 'mindless sheep' because they like different music to you, is incredibly narcissistic and arrogant. Similarly, presuming to know 'why' they are listening to said music ('thinking they are doing something creative') is completely illogical - perhaps they don't have any delusions about why they are listening. They may, in turn, believe that some hip-hop or techno is totally uncreative, and derivative - since those words are entirely subjective, and that people like you are in fact the losers being so desperate to be 'creative' and 'new' to try and differentiate yourself, instead of just finding something you enjoy. And the argument your wife puts forward is not just that the people are happy so what's the harm - it's also that you have to entertain the possibility that you are wrong about music - maybe everyone else got it right.

As for the motivations of the musicians themselves, I don't really think that's relevant to the end consumer. Audi, Ferrari, Bentley all want to make the most money, as do Apple, Google, Samsung - and in doing so they try to produce the 'best' items which will appeal to the most people. This is far better than a guy in his back yard being 'creative' and shoving a jet engine in a van, thinking the rest of the world are 'sheep' for conforming to the 'derivative' cars that the experts develop.

RE: Garbage
By Solandri on 2/20/2012 6:27:50 AM , Rating: 4
It is one thing to make gobs of money selling derivative music to millions of people who like it. I may not like it, but I don't have a problem with it. I control how I spend my money, and other people control how they spend their money.

It is quite another thing to claim you invented that derivative music, and file lawsuits to prevent others from making music "derived from yours".

The problem isn't one of derivation. The problem is one of credit. The people who know your music is derived know that you didn't invent that style of music. But the people who don't know or refuse to believe it was derived will blindly defend your claims that you invented it. That's where the problem lies.

The wrongness is not in the popularity and making money. It's in taking advantage of people's ignorance to claim too much credit for yourself, and trying to block others from doing unto you as you did unto your predecessors.

RE: Garbage
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/20/2012 12:42:39 PM , Rating: 2
people like you are in fact the losers being so desperate
To stick up for Apple...just like you...

RE: Garbage
By CList on 2/21/2012 1:46:15 AM , Rating: 2
I think you may have missed my point, and may have taken this a bit too seriously. I was just spinning a yarn to entertain myself and to lighten the mood... I never said or meant to imply that people should like the same kind of music as me, or that there was anything wrong with the music they might like.

I simply have a hard time with the "it must be good if it's popular" argument because there's so much that goes into popularity that has nothing to do with the thing that's being evaluated as good or bad. That's it. That's the main theme of my little drama boiled down to one sentence. Man vs man and man vs himself, at the same time...

I mean, am I the only one who could see that I was mocking myself as well as stating my case? My wife will be disappointed that she had to have someone back her up on this, I've clearly not portrayed her fairly. She usually always... wins these little debates. (I thought I made that clear as well).

This is far better than a guy in his back yard being 'creative' and shoving a jet engine in a van, thinking the rest of the world are 'sheep' for conforming to the 'derivative' cars that the experts develop.

You paint a pretty bleak picture for someone who actually *is* new and creative and not into the status quo, you almost make it sound like you don't believe such a thing exists. Not everyone like your man-with-a-van is a kook... Let's not forget that once upon a time Steve Jobs was one of those guys in his garage soldering together circuit boards, thinking of the rest of the world as sheep for conforming to the 'derivative' computers that IBM developed... and look where it got him. So... Do you see Jobs as doing it to "make the most money", or was he doing it because he was just another "loser who was desperate to be new and creative"?

RE: Garbage
By Peter898 on 2/19/2012 11:57:53 AM , Rating: 1
That's why apples next gadget will be called

Now That's Entertainment
By Woodford on 2/18/12, Rating: -1
By geddarkstorm on 2/17/2012 10:25:16 PM , Rating: 3
I must know, did you buy a hat full of these, or did you find some Apple branded fortune cookies?

RE: Only Google could screw up unlocking a device.
By xytc on 2/18/2012 5:01:52 AM , Rating: 4
Some here are missing the big picture "slide to unlock" is in fact a "drag and drop" feature, so the Apple patent should have been invalidated from the start.

By CList on 2/18/2012 1:42:08 PM , Rating: 2
So tell me stoogie, how much does a viral marketing gig pay anyway?

"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki