Live data from Hacker News

A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

osnews.com

141–150 of 437 posts

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#141

"Just to drive the point home: a device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious.." I still don't buy it. This still misses the mark - it wasn't about a 'few' buttons, the iPhone was about none. All those pda's in the picture don't really mean anything to me. Sure, some of them had cell networking and a lot (most? all?) had wifi. But I would never consider the old pda's a mobile device. 'Mobile' to me comes fro…

I don't know about your iPhone, but my iPad has four buttons plus a scroll-lock switch.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You wouldn't even need to put a bunch of geniuses in a room together for an afternoon. All you would have to do is get a team to watch any episode of Star Trek:TNG and create something like the slates the Enterprise crew used. But the thing is, if the hardware components and UI skills existed, why wasn't anyone able to do it in the past? I think the answer is that on the manufacturer side, nobody cared about end-user…

I think it's even simpler. Only Apple had the supply chain to build an affordable device. Everyone else knew the outcome would be too expensive relative to the feature set. I love my iPad, but there's no way I would pay $1500 for it. It's just not that good. Only Apple could build one at a competitive cost.

Samsung obviously is capable of making a device like the iphone and making it affordably, since they are the supply chain. The fact that they make all the parts, but were unable to put them together, says something about Samsung.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#144

This entire trial was a farce. The jury foreman admitted that they "skipped" prior art because "It was bogging us down."[0] > "Once you determine that Samsung violated the patents," Ilagan said, "it's easy to just go down those different [Samsung] products because it was all the same. Like the trade dress, once you determine Samsung violated the trade dress, the flatscreen with the Bezel...then you go down the produc…

The groklaw quotes were taken out of context. As far as I can tell, there's no evidence from those quotes that they skipped prior art, so much as skipped the task to move forward on others before circling back around to it. > I don't like to think of Apple as a pure innovator - I think of them more as an assembler. When they see a market in which all the hardware pieces are available and waiting to be put together, t…

Have you read the jury Forman's own patent? It seems like he's got elite skills in the ignoring prior art department.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#145

Ever notice how Jony Ive looks nothing like a Googler? This whole trainwreck of a discussion is fed IMHO by the big rift between common, male IT-oriented folks and the rest of the population around visuals, aestethics and yes, concepts like fashion. Sit in the cantina of any company and you can tell who is development/IT. Neckbeards? Socks in sandals? Leather cowboy hats? Attachments on their belts? Unshapely bodies?…

"Ever notice how Jony Ive looks nothing like a Googler?"

What the f is this shit? This guy:https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-UxbxdEwXL7Y/AAAAAAAAAAI/A...

is the counterpart to Jony Ive. And that goes for the rest of your head-in-your-ass bigotry.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#146
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The LG Prada pre-dates the iPhone and was actually the first phone to have a capacitive touch screen. It had as many buttons as the infringing Samsung devices ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada ). This was noticed at the time of the iPhone launch too: http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/11/iphone-and-lg-ke850-separ... This is all silly though, Apple wasn't making the argument based on Samsung making a touch based ph…

If you read the jury comments though, they made a single decision based on the overall look and feel of the device, and then applied that decision to all the arguments. Essentially, they felt like Samsung had broadly copied apple's look and feel, therefore apple deserved exclusive ownership of things like rubber band, whether they invented it or not.

I think that was a part of their decision. If Samsung had come forward and said, "ok, this this and this we copied, but that we didn't" I expect they would have gotten a better response. But the blanket denial killed a lot of their credibility.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#147
post #22

And the Atari Jaguar was both the first 64-bit videogame console and the first videogame console with a GPU. But history is written by the victors... And never mind the Atari STylus demoed in 1991... Never happened...

Uhm, no. The Atari Jaguar was a 32-bit with a 64-bit bus to memory not 64-bit addressing or registers. It would not be counted as a 64-bit processor particularly since it used a 68000 and its GPU was 32-bit. The Amiga CD32 beat it to market by a month. I would argue the whole Atari game line based on the 400/800 should count, but others peg the Amiga as the first with a GPU. GO Corporation was formed in 1987 and can…

Incorrect but don't take my word for it: let's go look at the Tom and Jerry instruction manual at http://www.hillsoftware.com/files/atari/jaguar/jag_v8.pdf

On page 50 describing the GPU instruction set, you should note right at the top the instruction LOADP which I quote is a:

"64-bit memory read. The source register contains a 32-bit byte address, which must be phrase aligned. The destination register will have the low long-word loaded into it, the high long-word is available in the high-half register. This applies to external memory only."

Not surprisingly, the companion instruction STOREP is described on page 56.

Now let's move on to the the Blitter on page 64: "The tour de force of the Blitter is its ability to generate Gouraud shaded polygons, using Z-buffering, in sixteen bit pixel mode. A lot of the logic in the Blitter is devoted to its ability to create these pixels four at a time, and to write them at a rate limited only by the bus bandwidth"

which is also a 64-bit operation.

Finally, while conceptually one could argue that the Atari 800 had a GPU (if you consider 4 players and a missile to be such) did the CD32 have direct hardware-assisted support for gouraud shading, texture-mapping (and if you were remotely clever, 64-bit texture mapping), and Z-buffering as the Atari Jaguar did? I don't think so but I'm open to being corrected here. I do think that having such support supports the claim that said Atari Jaguar was the first console with a true GPU.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#148

Also see openmoko (2006): http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Cheap-hackable-Linux... "The Neo1973 is based on a Samsung S3C2410 SoC (system-on-chip) application processor, powered by an ARM9 core. It will have 128MB of RAM, and 64MB of flash, along with an upgradable 64MB MicroSD card. Typical of Chinese phone designs, the Neo1973 sports a touchscreen, rather than a keypad -- in this case, an ultra-high resoluti…

Yeah. Unfortunately, the hardware was atrocious, and despite the awesome work OpenedHand (now part of Intel) did on the interface apps, it wasn't that great even back then.

However, they did have a wiki page for some of the design back in 2006 showing pinch-to-zoom.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's even simpler. Only Apple had the supply chain to build an affordable device. Everyone else knew the outcome would be too expensive relative to the feature set. I love my iPad, but there's no way I would pay $1500 for it. It's just not that good. Only Apple could build one at a competitive cost.

>> Only Apple had the supply chain to build an affordable device Don't disagree, but if you flash back to 2007, there was still a huge outcry over the "high" price of the iPhone. People back then had forgotten that they had paid just as much for the first Razr.

Also, don't forget that the first iPhone got a $100+ (150?) price break after the first month. They had no idea how popular it was going to be. Not even Apple had appreciated exactly how much the market was waiting for a good touchscreen phone.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#150

This entire trial was a farce. The jury foreman admitted that they "skipped" prior art because "It was bogging us down."[0] > "Once you determine that Samsung violated the patents," Ilagan said, "it's easy to just go down those different [Samsung] products because it was all the same. Like the trade dress, once you determine Samsung violated the trade dress, the flatscreen with the Bezel...then you go down the produc…

The groklaw quotes were taken out of context. As far as I can tell, there's no evidence from those quotes that they skipped prior art, so much as skipped the task to move forward on others before circling back around to it. > I don't like to think of Apple as a pure innovator - I think of them more as an assembler. When they see a market in which all the hardware pieces are available and waiting to be put together, t…

> As far as I can tell, there's no evidence from those quotes that they skipped prior art,

Except the actual quotes.

> so much as skipped the task to move forward on others before circling back around to it.

So they skipped it. Whether they came back to it is somewhat pointless. That they skipped an earlier question means that later questions were based on uninformed assumptions about patents.

> Sigh. I'm sick and tired of people twisting reality to fit an Apple anti-hero narrative.

As opposed to what, suggesting in one sentence that they didn't skip the question, and then saying they did skip it but came back later, as if they are fundamentally the same? They aren't. Even the juror's admit that the ordering of questions was important to their verdict. Suggesting otherwise is silly.

Post reply on HN