#BoycottApple trending on Google plus due to Galaxy Nexus ban

Post by jervisfm » Sun, Jul 01, 2012, 10:33 PM UTC

KirinDave wrote: post #307

0xABADC0DA wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple Legal is at odds with Apple Engineering, trying to litigate away the competition instead of innovating past them I don't even... what do you expect Apple Legal to innovate? "Accept EULA to unlock?" They aren't at odds with engineering any more than having a good defense is at odds with having a good offense. Have you used an up-to-date android phone in the last 6 months? Perhaps even gotten to play with an Nexu…

> I don't even... what do you expect Apple Legal to innovate? Apple Engineering creates great products. Apple Legal pays private security firms and complicit local officials to storm journalist's houses. Apple Engineering is trying to create a reputation as a great place to work, Apple Legal is scaring away engineers left and right. Apple Legal plays dirty, Apple Engineering and Design talk about the nobility of grea…

Post by elehack » Sun, Jul 01, 2012, 11:03 PM UTC

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #255

technoslut wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if Panic had any patents regarding this. The patent system doesn't really benefit the small developer. I was listening to Build & Analyze and Marco Arment was asked if he would patent features of Instapaper and he essentially said that it is more pain than it's worth. They don't have time time and money required to enforce it.

That is a horrible idea now that patents in the US are first to file rather than first to invent. You leave yourself open to somebody else patenting it, then coming back and suing you. Sure, you might be able to get that patent thrown out, but there is no guarantee and you are dumping a ton of money on lawyers in the process. Like it or not, patent trolling is just getting warmed up.

Post by prodigal_erik » Sun, Jul 01, 2012, 11:47 PM UTC

dspeyer wrote: post #139

zhoutong wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a small scale, petitions will work better than a hash tag on a Google-owned website. The person that made the decision is the judge. So a rational way to protest is to protest the decision itself. On a large scale, make something disruptively innovative to fight back. #BoycottApple may work by alarming and reminding Apple of their unethical act (to the crowd). But the effect is small because it has nothing to do w…

Remember Amazon and one-click? There was sufficient backlash that they never tried anything like that again. Could work with Apple.

Post by vacri » Mon, Jul 02, 2012, 1:19 AM UTC

msabalau wrote: post #168

chmars wrote: post #84

Why is such a trend on Google+ relevant? As much as I would like to embrace Google+ as a Facebook alternative, Google+ has still a very limited audience – and, of course, a very Android-focus audience … EDIT: Downvoting my comment just because it isn't enthusiastic on Google+? Comm'on!

It is appealing to see a down-voting complaint for an unpopular opinion related to a comment which dismisses a trend on Google+ being irrelevant because the network is relatively unpopular. I doubt the 75 million people who use Google+ consider themselves a "very limited audience." Regardless, not a reason for down-voting.

Post by Gigablah » Mon, Jul 02, 2012, 1:57 AM UTC

Terretta wrote: post #245

przemelek wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope ;-) Problem with Apple is that if all players will play using Apple strategy we will not have any innovation at all. Motorola, Nokia, Samsung invested billions in mobile technology without knowing if this will even work, they risked and created cell phones and so on. They had big invest, big risk and at the end big win. Apple didn't take any risk, they simply polished existing products and started to sell it wit…

> Apple didn't take any risk, they simply polished existing products and started to sell it with much higher price tag. This comment invalidates everything else you wrote. Apple's investment in R&D for mobile handheld usability and devices predates even the existence of some of these litigants, and predates the "smartphones" by them.