Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#251

Post by eddieplan9 » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 3:39 AM UTC

cageface wrote: post #230

pooriaazimi wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. I find Apple's strategy more solid and sustainable than their competitors'. BTW, I just wanted to say you have a GitHub link on your HN profile that leads to a 404. I thought maybe that was a mistake and you might want to fix it :)

It seems like essentially the same strategy that lost them the desktop wars after taking an early lead with the Mac. I don't see why we should expect things to be any different this time, although their vertical approach is better suited to mobile. Thanks for heads up on github. Fixed.

...that lost them the desktop wars after taking an early lead with the Mac

The fact is that they never took an early lead with the Mac [1]. They did take an lead with iPod. See how that worked out quite well for them.

[1] http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/08/from-altair-to-ipad-...

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#252

Post by Anechoic » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 3:39 AM UTC

cageface wrote: post #235

gurkendoktor wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget that Apple has a mountain of cash and an insane advantage in the tablet market. Macs are on the rise too. All this can be used to keep people in the Apple ecosystem. (iCloud is surprisingly meh, though.) Not saying that Apple will succeed, but the future doesn't seem so clear to me.

I think Apple is here to stay but I don't see how they can sustain their phenomenal profit levels if their market share keeps slipping unless they keep winning in the courts. What I'd like to see is a healthy market with two or three real competitors. It's much better for consumers and developers than another decade of monoculture protected by patent minefields.

What I'd like to see is a healthy market with two or three real competitors.

As would I, although I would like that market to offer real choice, and not just one first-mover and 1-2 copycats. Microsoft, Palm and Nokia managed to figure out how to make a touchscreen phone that isn't a warmed-over iPhone, I hope this provides the push for Samsung to do the same.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#253

Post by angryasian » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 3:43 AM UTC

cageface wrote: post #244

ellyagg wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apart from the specifics of this or any other court case involving Apple attacking Samsung, I find the desire to defend Samsung odd. Obviously they copied Apple as much as they felt they could get away with. They did this because it was a very conservative way to make a lot of money. This isn't an admirable strategy. It's annoying. It's precisely the strategy that major movie studios use to give us one boring, risk-f…

I don't have any particular loyalty to Samsung but these cases set a chilling precedent for the platform that looks likely to dominate the computing industry for at least the next decade. There's much more at stake here than a few billion dollars and a few icons and scrolling techniques. If this continues we're going to spend the next decade tiptoeing around every trivial implementation detail of mobile UI instead of…

Not only that, its going to set innovating in the mobile space back even farther. While Apple outlines every decision meticulously for planned obsolescence, Google and others take a more throw something out there, see if it works and run with it approach. With both strongly competing it pushes the entire industry forward faster.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#254

Post by tptacek » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 3:46 AM UTC

cooldeal wrote: post #250

tptacek wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when did profit become the one and true metric? This is like wondering whether you'd be better off running a grocery store rather than a software business. Profit is the only metric. The idea that this notion started with Apple is strange.

Looking at only the earnings reports and comparing profits is meaningless. If you follow the Gruber link it shows that Amazon's net profit is only $7M. That does not mean Amazon is having trouble making any money. It's that it's costs of expanding are swallowing the profits. Apple has a ton of cash in the bank lying around because they don't see a need for using it. Directly comparing the numbers makes no sense whats…

You're talking about John Gruber. I'm just talking about profit. Obviously, companies routinely defer profitability. Is that what you think Samsung, or any other Android vendor for that matter, is doing? I don't. Comparing the iPhone business with Amazon is an apples/oranges comparison. Comparing Samsung's Android business with the iPhone isn't.

Like Gruber, don't like Gruber, I don't care. But let's not introduce the meme that "profit" is a meaningless metric. It is the only metric. Companies that are optimized for something other than profit today are doing so in the service of profit, and nothing other than profit, tomorrow.

"Revenue", less profits, is money that doesn't belong to you.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#255

Post by RichardButler » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 3:46 AM UTC

wmf wrote: post #240

RichardButler wrote: post #183

I wonder if this will actually end up hurting Apple's bottom line in the end. Samsung is one of Apples largest hardware providers and one of the few that can produce screens of sufficient resolution for Apple's retina displays. Wouldn't be surprised if Samsung recoups their loses just by raising their hardware prices.

If Samsung tried to raise prices for components, Apple would just buy those components somewhere else, causing Samsung's revenue to tank. Just look at what happened to PortalPlayer.

Samsung is the only producer of screens that can meet the quality and quantity requirements of apple. I remember hearing they even had problems keeping up with the demand. I seriously doubt Apple could come up with another supplier.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#256

Post by angryasian » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 3:47 AM UTC

cageface wrote: post #230

pooriaazimi wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. I find Apple's strategy more solid and sustainable than their competitors'. BTW, I just wanted to say you have a GitHub link on your HN profile that leads to a 404. I thought maybe that was a mistake and you might want to fix it :)

It seems like essentially the same strategy that lost them the desktop wars after taking an early lead with the Mac. I don't see why we should expect things to be any different this time, although their vertical approach is better suited to mobile. Thanks for heads up on github. Fixed.

>The fact is that they never took an early lead with the Mac

@eddieplan You might not be old enough to remember but the macintosh and earlier apple computers were the first commercially successful computers for the home market.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#257

Post by angryasian » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 3:47 AM UTC

cageface wrote: post #230

pooriaazimi wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. I find Apple's strategy more solid and sustainable than their competitors'. BTW, I just wanted to say you have a GitHub link on your HN profile that leads to a 404. I thought maybe that was a mistake and you might want to fix it :)

It seems like essentially the same strategy that lost them the desktop wars after taking an early lead with the Mac. I don't see why we should expect things to be any different this time, although their vertical approach is better suited to mobile. Thanks for heads up on github. Fixed.

>The fact is that they never took an early lead with the Mac

@eddieplan You might not be old enough to remember but the macintosh and earlier apple computers were the first commercially successful computers for the home market.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#258

Post by benihana » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 3:48 AM UTC

cageface wrote: post #210

programminggeek wrote: post #10

This is both unsurprising and somewhat meaningless as there will be an appeals process that will last for months and possibly years. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see that Samsung made their products to look like Apple products. They changed their icon styles and other UI elements away from Android standards to match the Apple style. Some of the things Apple invented and patented on like pinch to zoom an…

Apple has done a good job of persuading people that this case was about protecting innovation and about Samsung's specific alleged infringements of their patents. But this is nothing more than a smoke screen for their ongoing proxy war on Android. They've refused to compete with Android on price, features, and form factors and the market has punished them for it. Expect more attacks on Android seeking ridiculous dama…

>They've refused to compete with Android on price, features, and form factors and the market has punished them for it.

In what universe did the market punish them? Apple has shipped 250 million phones and made 150 billion dollars in revenue in the five years since the iPhone shipped[1]. Each iPhone version has sold more than every other version combined[2].

[1]http://techcrunch.com/2012/06/27/strategy-analytics-apple-ha...

[2]http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/08/03/apples-phil-schiller-...

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#259

Post by lenkite » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 3:49 AM UTC

So lets look at some of the infringing patents that the news articles are quoting...

381 patent: "rubber band" effect where a page "bounces" when a user scrolls to the bottom

I personally had written JS bounce-back product picture slide-shows for a shopping cart in 2003/2004 using the horrible browser APIs of that era...wish I had patented that..1 billion..yum. I am quite certain hundreds of people have coded bounce-back animations before even iPhone 1.0.

915 patent: Pinch to Zoom. Isn't this the natural translation of how one drags handlebars in opposite directions in order to zoom-in ? I am quite certain there would be prior art by a lot of CAD software.

163 patent: "Double tap to enlarge/zoom". facepalm. Just about everyone does this on the PC using a mouse. How can one even file a patent for this ?

D '305 patent: "Grid of rounded square icons" -> The joke of the decade. What has every desktop OS being doing since the 90s ???

This is extremely upsetting. Is this what civilization is coming to ? If things continue this way, the working population of the world will be employed as patent lawyers squabbling all the time in courts.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#260

Post by esolyt » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 3:52 AM UTC

CamperBob2 wrote: post #195

azakai wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you can also make an Android phone. You just need to avoid infringing these specific patents either by removing functionality or implementing it in another way. This lawsuit did not find that "Android" helplessly infringes Apple patents in all cases. Just that the combination of Android, Samsung's software modifications to Android, and Samsung hardware, together infringed several very specific Apple patents.

No, you can also make an Android phone. You just need to avoid infringing these specific patents either by removing functionality or implementing it in another way. As magicalist points out elsewhere in the thread, it is utterly impossible for anyone to build anything resembling a modern smartphone without infringing claim 8 of Apple's '915 patent. You can build a phone or a tablet, but whatever you build will not be…

Apple doesn't have a patent for one finger scrolling or pinch zooming. If the claim you are talking about is one finger scrolling, having that feature is not enough to violate the whole patent. The patent in question is about a method to detect transition from scrolling to zooming. It will be worked around.