backtop


Print 103 comment(s) - last by smac.. on Mar 20 at 2:23 AM


Despite Apple's patents on cell phone touch gestures, HTC was the first to bring a touch-gesture driven phone to the market, with its HTC Touch, released in June 2007.  (Source: Overseas Electronics)
Company is standing up to Apple's patent claims

HTC says in a press release that it is prepared to fight back against Apple's patent litigation in court.  It has not yet filed an official response or countersued, but that should follow within a few weeks.

Apple is currently suing HTC to block the import of Android handsets into the U.S.  Apple claims that it invented a host of technologies including a touch-screen finger-swipe unlock gestures, mobile object oriented graphics, and undervolting a mobile CPU via an interrupt.  These somewhat vague and far-reaching patents form the basis of Apple's claims.  Apple CEO Jobs released a statement casting his company as the tireless innovator and his rivals as thieves.

Peter Chou, chief executive officer, HTC Corporation, says that HTC won't tolerate Apple's bullying.  He states, "HTC disagrees with Apple's actions and will fully defend itself. HTC strongly advocates intellectual property protection and will continue to respect other innovators and their technologies as we have always done, but we will continue to embrace competition through our own innovation as a healthy way for consumers to get the best mobile experience possible."

The press release points out that HTC achieved many industry firsts -- the first Windows PDA (1998), the first Windows Phone (2002), the first gesture-based smart phone (June 2007), and the first Google Android smart phone (October 2008).  Along the way it piled up a fair amount of intellectual property, which could give it ammo against Apple in court.

Some are speculating that Google, makers of the Android operating system, may intervene and aid its handset developers legally to prevent Apple trying to stomp out the growing Android movement at the hardware level.

The stakes are high.  If Apple wins, it could effectively take many of the top Android handsets off the U.S. market, including the HTC Hero, MyTouch, Nexus One, and the soon-to-be-released Incredible.  If HTC wins, on the other hand, it will likely damage Apple's image and give the Android movement more momentum.



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Apple Defense
By Luticus on 3/18/2010 11:20:26 AM , Rating: 4
So wait... forcing hardware manufacturers to adhere to certain standards so that their devices can take full advantage of your software is coping iPhone... WHAT!

Apple invented multi-touch?... um no...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch
The concept has been around for quite some time.

By the way, high-end hardware requirements does not equate to uniform.

Just because I've never owned an iPhone doesn't mean I've never seen/used them before. I have on several occasions had to sync them to exchange servers, set up calendars, and many other things at work for many of our users and I have friends who own them as well. Beyond that the iPod OS is the same as the iPhone OS and my brother owns one of those which I help him with all the time. I'm just unwilling to outright say something is total crap with out ever owning it. This doesn't, however, mean that I can't read spec sheets and decided based on research I've done that I'd prefer a different phone.

I know enough about the iPhone to say that from what I've seen Windows Mobile 7 looks nothing at all like it so far.


RE: Apple Defense
By Pirks on 3/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: Apple Defense
By Bateluer on 3/18/2010 12:41:13 PM , Rating: 2
Pirks, you know damn well that Apple didn't invent multitouch. Its been present in both capacitive and resistive touch screens, neither invented or first implemented by Apple either, for years prior to the iPhone's development.


RE: Apple Defense
By Pirks on 3/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: Apple Defense
By ICBM on 3/18/2010 6:01:57 PM , Rating: 2
Didn't Apple start using an optical mouse after Microsoft proved it to be great? Nobody here blames/points fingers at Apple for doing this, if anything they applaud it. I don't think anyone here would accuse Apple in the way you are accusing Microsoft, yet the roles are reversed and here we are.


RE: Apple Defense
By cheetah2k on 3/18/2010 9:39:51 PM , Rating: 1
I didnt realise Perks was blowing Jobs too...

"Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no Jobs: for thou Google is with me; thy Nexus One and thy Android, they comfort me..."


RE: Apple Defense
By Pirks on 3/18/10, Rating: 0
RE: Apple Defense
By ICBM on 3/19/2010 12:26:47 PM , Rating: 2
Still waiting on a response regarding the optical mouse!


RE: Apple Defense
By Pirks on 3/19/2010 5:57:43 PM , Rating: 2
I have no information proving that it was MS who pioneered optical mice and started to sell them before Apple did, are you sure it was not someone else like Logitech? Got info/links on that?


RE: Apple Defense
By Luticus on 3/18/2010 12:44:22 PM , Rating: 2
Regarding the hardware standards it's more about the fact that the older software could run on lower end equipment without sacrificing much performance. Speculation: Now on the newer OS they realize that if 3rd parties release the OS on crappy hardware that their OS will take the blame in the same way Vista did. I'd say it's more learning from their past than copying iPhones "smashing success". Besides that, iPhone doesn't have specific hardware requirements that 3rd parties have to meet because iPhone OS can only run on Apple hardware PERIOD! Therefore iPhone has NOTHING at all to do with 3rd party hardware. Even more than that are you seriously suggesting Apple has exclusive rights to minimum specification requirements (what don't you give Apple credit for)? So every game or piece of software released since the 80's, hell probably even before then, has somehow copied Apple with minimum specifications?? You can't be serious!? Minimum specs aren't about uniformity, they are to ensure that the hardware has the capability to take advantage of the software to a certain level. Manufacturers still have the option to include more features and add their personal touches in whatever why they like as long as they keep the minimum specs in mind.

I don't select by spec sheets alone (though they do help), I also read reviews, ask friends who have already made the purchase, go to stores and check out demos, use trial periods, etc. to make purchasing decisions. If you blindly purchase something just because the manufacturer says it's good than that's not saying much about your ability to make smart purchases, not that I care. Though I don't understand what, if anything, my selection method for purchasing decisions has to do with the argument at hand regarding MS copying Apple.

Furthermore, using something in your spec list that is technically better isn't exactly copying your competition if what you're using is freely available by other vendors, that's like saying a car manufacturer is copying another because it uses the same vendor for tires, even though the design of the entire car differs in nearly every other aspect.


RE: Apple Defense
By djc208 on 3/18/2010 12:49:05 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Yes because MS decided to do that after smashing success of iPhone. Before iPhone the MS policies were exact opposite.


Actually didn't MS start this process with Windows XP like 10 years ago? Minimum system requirements, signed driver system, logo approved hardware. Vista for certain required certain minimum or approved core components and hardware, hence all the "certified for Vista" stickers on everything from graphics cards to monitors.

MS is just doing the same thing with their phone OS. Still not the same as building the phones themselves or via third party to their specs like they do with the Zune or XBox.


RE: Apple Defense
By Pirks on 3/18/10, Rating: 0
RE: Apple Defense
By Mitch101 on 3/18/2010 1:18:02 PM , Rating: 3
Pirks I wont tell you to F-O. Generally when you copy something its on similarities not missing features. Its like saying Microsoft device doesn't have MKV playback just like the iPhone, It doesn't cut onions just like the iPhone doesn't either. OMG! There stealing! Copy and Paste would be a technical advantage instead of a known hindrance of the iPhone it being left out is just Microsoft being stupid to consumer wants in a portable device not black helicopter copy Apple stuff.

Now I will give you one but I dont recall you mentioning it. Adobe Flash. Apple can say whatever it wants for why the iPhone doesn't support flash but its a basic business decision and that is if the iPhone were able to run Flash then they would lose money to people using flash based applications/games bypassing the Apple App store. It's all about the dollars.

I believe you are more Anti-Microsoft and your finding more popularity with the Apple crowd. Youve found an identity for yourself there. You also turn a blind eye when Apple does the same. It reminds me of the people who get very upset when Microsoft adds a similar feature found in Linux but never acknowledge that every generation of Linux looks more and more like Windows. Do you have any anger toward Apple for stealing from Xerox? Probably not because Apple made the Xerox stuff very nice but you harbor resentment for Microsoft beating Apple. Why? Because Steve Jobs convinced you Microsoft stole THEIR idea for a gui and mouse?

The reality is they all take from each other and for the record I find Linux good for some things but I prefer Windows for ease of use. I think the iPhone is a great device but not secure enough for business critical information. We recently demonstrated hacking the iPhone to obtain corporate info from the device in only a few minutes.

Let me express my view of the Windows Mobile device and what I see.

I see the Microsoft Windows Mobile 7 device to be a bigger threat to the #1 mobile device franchise which is Blackberry. Windows Mobile 7 ties in with a lot of the Microsoft business applications. If anyone stands to lose market share its RIM from Microsoft, Apple, and Google.

Microsoft for a long time mentioned they wanted to get into the portable gaming business. Microsoft's target would be the #1 portable gaming system being the Nintendo DS. Will it be better? Not sure about that the DS is great but Im sure there will be enough titles to keep my interest. This is a perk not a priority.

Why dont I consider the iPhone in both analogies above.
Not secure enough for corporate use. (Deal Killers)
Doesnt support Flash (This does blow)
Doesn't do cut and paste (Not overly important but would be nice)

I'm a blackberry user and Im highly interested in the Windows Mobile 7 device. I envy the iPhone but cant afford to have its limitations. Droid is cool but I know with a Windows Mobile device I will have work and play.


RE: Apple Defense
By Pirks on 3/18/10, Rating: 0
RE: Apple Defense
By Mitch101 on 3/18/2010 5:13:24 PM , Rating: 2
No need for Blackberry Servers
No need to purchase Blackberry Server Licenses
No need to purchase licenses for every blackberry user
No need to purchase T-Support

Windows Mobile 6.5 phones are the only ones that have the Outlook Mobile client that uses the new features in Outlook 2010 such as Conversation View of e-mails and having audio and transcriptions of voicemails delivered to inboxes. Windows mobile 7 devices will have the same if not better.

Every mailbox with a BlackBerry connection to Exchange uses five times the connection resources that a mailbox with an Exchange ActiveSync client uses.

http://www.cio.com/article/506920/Exchange_2010_Wh...


RE: Apple Defense
By ICBM on 3/18/2010 5:56:22 PM , Rating: 2
Hasn't Apple ripped of quite a bit from Microsoft recently? Moving to x86 just like Windows? Or how about selling a mouse with more than one button?

While by your definition they has copied Apple, however I would give Apple more credit(and WinMo7). They both are evaluating markets, what works and what doesn't. It would be stupid not to take advantage of your competitors successes and mistakes.

Now to say that WinMo7 is copying iphone 1.0 because they lack features? Odd choice, but lets see where it goes. Including/Excluding features can be considered copying in this world. Colored screen, backlit screen, wallpapers on a phone, phone that plays mp3s, contact list/address book, calender, push buttons, push buttons to control volume, a button to silence the phone, a phone that can sync with a computer,etc.....

So by these rules, in this world, it kind of looks like the iphone is the copycat device, no?


RE: Apple Defense
By Pirks on 3/18/2010 10:37:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Moving to x86 just like Windows?
Did Windows move from PPC to x86? No? Then what did Apple rip off then?
quote:
how about selling a mouse with more than one button?
Well, if multibutton mice were invented by MS...
quote:
kind of looks like the iphone is the copycat device
In that sense yes, every device in some sense is copycat of another one, so your statement is not news at all.


RE: Apple Defense
By ICBM on 3/19/2010 12:24:56 PM , Rating: 2
Let me rephrase what you quoted to clarify:

Apple started using x86 for their products because of market saturation. x86 was always faster and much faster speed bumps than PPC, thanks to market saturation. This is thanks to Microsoft. So you can say Apple is piggy backing on what Microsoft made popular/dominant. So you ask what Apple ripped off? They are using something Windows made popular. In your context of claiming WinMo7 is ripping stuff off, it seems like the same thing to me.

I never claimed MS invented multibutton mice. They did make
it the dominant type of mouse. How many years was Apple criticized for one button mice? Then they finally start offing multibutton mice. Microsoft didn't invent them, and Apple didn't invent any of the things you are claiming WinMo7 is ripping off.

Final quote, the argument makes sense because you are claiming including/excluding common features is what can be considered a copycat. The point I was making, and I think you picked up on, is that including/excluding features isn't a big deal and is part of the business. You pointing out that WinMo7 is ripping off iphone opens the can of worms my argument was aluding to.


RE: Apple Defense
By Pirks on 3/19/2010 6:24:23 PM , Rating: 2
There's still difference between ripping off a design of a product and switching hardware platform from less popular to more popular. The difference is: x86 was not designed by MS, while iPhone WAS designed by Apple.
quote:
Apple didn't invent any of the things you are claiming WinMo7 is ripping off
Things alone just by themselves mean nothing, but when you start piecing them together you get a mosaic that looks exactly like iPhone 1.0. This little missing feature, that tiny missing feature, that newly added feature, this restriction, that one, this minor thing and that one - ALL TOGETHER were belonging to iPhone before.

So yeah, getting just someone's nose or piece of mustache is not going to give you someone else's face, but when you grab all the facial details of another person (figuratively speaking of course) your face suddenly looks JUST LIKE THAT OTHER GUY WE KNEW FOR SO LONG.

Same's with iPhone and WinMo7 - their "faces", their little features and restrictions look SO MUCH LIKE EACH OTHER that it's a nobrainer who ripped off who _this_ time.


"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il














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