Print 61 comment(s) - last by retrospooty.. on May 29 at 3:08 AM

  (Source: Trolls News)
Unable to compete, the Cupertino company claims that Google and Samsung stole features from Siri

Given that the massive Galaxy S IV doesn't look too much like the much smaller 4-inch iPhone 5, Apple Inc. (AAPL) is having to turn to new and creative routes to try to convince federal judges and juries to ban its competitor’s flagship product.

I. Apple Targets Samsung Again

Samsung is doing quite well with the Galaxy S IV, moving 10 million units in a mere four weeks.  Overall Samsung is outselling Apple 2-to-1 in unit sales.  In addition, Samsung is approaching Apple in profitability for the first time; while Apple has seen its own profit margins slide for the first time in years.

Thus it is perhaps expected that Apple would be return to its favorite tactic -- looking to troll Samsung in court.

Galaxy S IV
The Samsung Galaxy S IV

Its latest accusation is that Google Inc.’s (GOOG) Android "Google Now" service violates five invention claims that Apple has patented, with respect to its Siri voice search/assistant that it co-designed with Nuance Communications Inc. (NUAN).

The patents asserted are:

13-05-21 Apple Motion to Amend Infringement Contentions

But wait, you say, what could patents filed at least four years before Siri was released (or ten or more years in most cases) have to do with Siri or Google Now?  And what in the world do graphical user interface patents (the latter two patents from the 90s) have to do with voice search?

II. Apple Looks to Use Ambiguous Decade-Old Patents Against Samsung

Apple contends that the trio of initial patents -- which cover interaction with ambiguous data constructs -- can be applied to Siri, Google Now, (or likely most other pieces of software).  And Apple says its equally ambiguous UI "inventions" are fair game, as Google Now is activated by an on-screen button at times, replacing the previous "Android Quick Search Box".

According to a filing obtained by Florian Mueller, an anti-Google blogger paid by Google's legal rivals, Apple writes, "The Galaxy S4 product practices many of the same claims already asserted by Apple… in the same way as the already-accused Samsung devices."

Unable to compete, Apple is helping the courts lend it a helping hand in its war against Samsung. [Image Source: Cult of Mac]
Judge Paul S. Grewal of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California will rule on Apple's request to tack on the patents at a June 25 hearing.  

As Samsung and Apple wind up to a second trial, in which Apple is targeting dozens of Samsung smartphones and tablets for bans, the Cupertino company is watching its first $1.05B USD court win over Samsung start to unravel with a pair of patent invalidations by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).  Apple also failed to secure any lasting bans on current Samsung products in that case.

Sources: AppleInsider, Scribd

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: Typical Apple strategy
By Shadowself on 5/22/2013 4:34:54 PM , Rating: 3
And FireWire, while not exclusive to Macs, never made a dent in a market that was already using USB.
This was due to Apple's initial licensing policy. It was (IIRC) a minimum of $5,000 for a base license plus $1.00 for each connector. This meant that if you wanted to build a Firewire cable you had to pay Apple $2.00 (two connectors on the cable) plus the initial fee. Back in 1990 when Firewire started that was a truly asinine fee -- and still would be today!

Most people don't understand Apple's reluctance to enhance currently used technology like everyone else does. My new PC has USB 3 ports, which accept my USB 1 and 2 devices, no problem. It also has SATA 3, which accept SATA 1 and 2. Apple doesn't believe in backwards compatibility, even with its own technology.
Actually, even Firewire was updated. It started out in 1990 as a link that topped out at 50 Mbps. The next generation jumped to 400 Mbps maximum -- with the same connector. The IEEE committee made the move to a different connector when they went to the 800/1600 Mbps version even thought they kept that connector when they finally went to 3200 Mbps over copper. (And Just FYI, Firewire did 3200 Mbps over copper many, many years ago -- shortly after it was picked up as an IEEE standard.) You can go back even further with things like NUBUS being updated and backwardly compatible. Even the 30 pin connector transport stream for the iDevices got updated along the way, but most people (especially the users) never noticed.

The problem is that when Apple makes a jump from one connector to another it either has no apparent reason to do so or does an extremely poor job in explaining to users why they've made the change.

As to user replaceable hardware, Apple was among the first companies to start the trend of being unable to do your own upgrades or repairs.
Apple has long been a proponent of the computer being an appliance. The original Mac back in 1984 was not designed to be opened or modified in any way. You could add an extra external 400 kB floppy drive, but other than that it was not modifiable. Hell, it didn't even come with an extended keyboard! So the "trend" at Apple started 30 years ago. No one should be surprised that the latest Apple products are not designed to be modified by end users. If your taste (like mine) is to have a product that is configurable by the end user then stay away from certain Apple products.

Apple extending this 30+ year design philosophy to iDevices should be pretty obvious to anyone who has even given a glance to Apple over the years. If you like Apple's philosophy, buy their stuff. If you don't, then don't.

As to that trade off, that's BS. Other companies have no problem creating removable batteries in thin phones. Look at Samsung's Galaxy S4.
It's not 100% BS. A removable battery inherently weights more or has lower capacity. The removable cover on the phone inherently weighs more or is less rigid. There are tradeoffs. Are those tradeoffs enough to cause you to buy one phone over the other? That's a matter of personal choice.

RE: Typical Apple strategy
By Tony Swash on 5/23/13, Rating: -1
"It's okay. The scenarios aren't that clear. But it's good looking. [Steve Jobs] does good design, and [the iPad] is absolutely a good example of that." -- Bill Gates on the Apple iPad

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