Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#191

Post by JoeCortopassi » Sat, Jun 30, 2012, 7:41 PM UTC

dedward wrote: post #176

JoeCortopassi wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where would Google be without the PageRank patent to give them a monopoly on search? Don't think many people have an issue with that.

Google has a patent on pagerank? If their algorithm was patented, it would be open for anyone to read and understand - just not to use. My understanding is their ranking is something they keep a closely guarded secret, and to apply for a patent on it would be silly. Or was pagerank something they did early on and I'm mixing up two things.

You got it mixed up. They built Google on the (patented) PageRank algorithm, but have since improved upon it to such a degree that the what they currently use bears little resemblance.

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#192

Post by JoeCortopassi » Sat, Jun 30, 2012, 8:35 PM UTC

fromhet wrote: post #145

JoeCortopassi wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where would Google be without the PageRank patent to give them a monopoly on search? Don't think many people have an issue with that.

I know less than little about most things, but wouldnt that m ake search engienes compete more, giving us, the users, better results? I think there's a fine line where on one side inventors cant net a profit without a time-based monopoly but on the other side of this fine line it's just hurting competition.

Sort of. The average search results would have gotten a little better, but only because Excite/Altavista/etc would have poached some key early employees of Google and walked away with their algorithm, which was Googles key advantage back then. So the big incumbents would be able to use PageRank AND their pre-existing market share to destroy google easily. The huge leap forward in search (and it was a huge leap) would have never happened, because their would be no challengers who could match the purchasing power and market share of incumbents

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#193

Post by JoeCortopassi » Sat, Jun 30, 2012, 8:36 PM UTC

eli wrote: post #178

JoeCortopassi wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where would Google be without the PageRank patent to give them a monopoly on search? Don't think many people have an issue with that.

Google's secret sauce has a lot less to do with page rankings and a lot more to do with how to do really cheap and efficient data processing.

So, if they had really crappy, but fast search results, they would be just as successful? That doesn't hold merit at all

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#194

Post by saurik » Sat, Jun 30, 2012, 8:53 PM UTC

jvm wrote: post #190

chacham15 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your exact claim has been taken into account, just the opposite direction: "Apple was ordered to post a bond of $95 million to enact the injunction, which would be used to pay Samsung damages if the decision is later reversed."

Oh wow, interesting! Although of course if this really has such a definable cash value, why can't that just be part of the award if Samsung loses?

Damages are not symmetric: the damage to Samsung of a prophylactic injunction might be comfortably converted to a dollar value, while those to Apple might still be "irreparable".

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#195

Post by JoeCortopassi » Sat, Jun 30, 2012, 8:53 PM UTC

Zaim3 wrote: post #151

masry wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the hell? How is the PageRank patent not protection to Google? If Yahoo, LiveSearch and whatever other famous search engine just went ahead and ripped off Google then Google wouldn't be the Google we know now... Proving it shouldn't be any more difficult than asserting any patent. The defendant would have to show how they're ranking pages I would imagine, and if there's an infringement, they're found guilty.

"What the hell? How is the PageRank patent not protection to Google?" Because it belongs to Stanford University, not Google.

Under exclusive license by Google. Basically the same as having the patent yourselves

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#196

Post by prodigal_erik » Sat, Jun 30, 2012, 9:06 PM UTC

arpit wrote: post #112

For the last couple of years I have been trying to stay objective about this (I actually do quite a bit of iOS programming in my day job in addition to Android) and have always tried to be more pro-android than anti-Apple, but I am finally done trying to walk the fence. Enough of this bullshit. Its time for consumers to be aware that every time they buy an Apple product, they are damaging the software industry and th…

For all that time, Apple's iOS strategy has been reducing developers to sharecroppers and selling deliberately crippled appliances instead of human-worthy tools. The average consumer is fine with that; there isn't even a majority of hackers here somewhat troubled like you were. So why would this suddenly be objectionable to them?

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#197

Post by dobalina » Sat, Jun 30, 2012, 10:03 PM UTC

I picked up my new Galaxy Nexus (phone) today. Loving it so far! Decided to go with the Nexus over the S3. Better price/performance ratio, and of course better support from Google on the pure Android experience. :)

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#198

Post by bryanlarsen » Sun, Jul 01, 2012, 12:12 AM UTC

jsz0 wrote: post #131

ericdykstra wrote: post #40

Does this kind of thing make anyone happy? Does anyone feel better about Apple the company because of this? It would be nice if supposedly innovative companies could, you know, just keep innovating instead of worrying about copycats catching up on stale technology (in this case, I don't think it's even clear that there is any sort of copycat-like activity). Apple makes a few excellent products, but this kind of thing…

Since everyone is suing everyone else I don't know why people want to single out Apple. They got hit pretty hard by Nokia a couple years ago. I think they learned a hard lesson about how the game really works. I don't know how to draw the distinction between Apple offensively suing Samsung and Motorola offensively suing Apple -- or for that matter Samsung counter-suing Apple. It's all the same game and everyone is pl…

Actually, IMO the Nokia lawsuit is a great example of why everybody picks on Apple and how Apple has changed the rules of the game.

The old rules of the game were that

1) all the big guys cross-licensed each other's patents 2) the big guys got together to create standards and used patents to monetize these standards.

Note that the old rules of the game weren't particularly fair to the little guys, but at least they weren't the mutual destruction that Apple has started.

Apple is a big player in #2, receiving a fair portion of the MP4 licensing profits, for example.

But of course, Apple being a relatively new phone maker doesn't have any skin in the "phone standards" game, and has to license them from the older players like Qualcomm, Nokia & Motorola. The standards agreement force these guys to license in a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory fashion (FRAND).

Nokia said that a patent cross-license was FRAND. If Apple were good guys, they would have agreed -- they could get these phone-essential patents for less or even no money. However, they were reserving these patents for offensive purposes, so Nokia & Apple couldn't come to an agreement, essentially forcing Nokia to sue them.

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#199

Post by eli » Sun, Jul 01, 2012, 12:51 AM UTC

JoeCortopassi wrote: post #193

eli wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google's secret sauce has a lot less to do with page rankings and a lot more to do with how to do really cheap and efficient data processing.

So, if they had really crappy, but fast search results, they would be just as successful? That doesn't hold merit at all

Don't be silly. I'm not saying search results aren't important; I'm saying they're not difficult. The specifics of Google's algorithm have to stay secret to make it harder to game them, but the real "secret sauce" is the stuff they don't talk much about: custom built networking switches, smart power grids, and clever software like Map/Reduce. I bet R&D spends a lot more on that stuff than on figuring out how to improve ranking order.

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#200

Post by philwelch » Sun, Jul 01, 2012, 7:28 AM UTC

jusben1369 wrote: post #84

thechut wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely agree with you ars, Apple is getting totally out of hand. They are becoming what Microsoft was in the 90's and it absolutely sickens me. Consumers have the right to choose what products they want to buy. I have been slowly switching away from the Apple products I own. And this just reaffirms that I will never buy another Apple product.

"They are becoming what Microsoft was in the 90's and it absolutely sickens me." Once you become the dominant player your mentality shifts from cocky upstart with nothing to loose to fat cat incumbent that thinks of nothing but protecting your turf. You might notice all of your friends who were liberal and poor in their 20's start voting conservative in their 40's once they have material wealth to protect - "less tax…

Also, all the liberal social causes you believed in when you were in your 20's are now the status quo, and the new crazy social causes are inconceivable to you now.