Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android

groklaw.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 101 posts

Re: The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android

#71

Post by spaghetti »

gurkendoktor wrote: post #53
spaghetti wrote: post #48

I'd love to see control of the "mobile space" be in the hands of individuals instead of large, for-profit and often evil companies. Clearly mobile computing is here to stay. If it wasn't then companies like apple and google wouldn't be fighting so hard for control. Imagine a decentralized app store where people can make a living without having to deal with apple's ridiculous review process or ideas of what's appropri…

> Imagine a decentralized app store where people can make a living without having to deal with apple's ridiculous review process or ideas of what's appropriate. So far, "freedom of App Store speech" and money don't seem to be correlated at all. (Or all the millionaires on OpenMoko and Cydia are being quiet to prevent a gold rush on their turf.) I think the only instance where Apple's guidelines are prohibitive to mak…

You're right about the money being at the traditional app stores. I'm trying to think ahead and see if this will change.

The enforcement of Apple's "guidelines" for apps harm developers' ability to make money on the app store far beyond porn. I have a non-porn, totally above-bar app that serves a niche that makes $n/day. I re-skinned my app to serve a different, larger niche and it was rejected multiple times for bizarre, ambiguous reasons. If this second app were in the store today I would be making more money. I'd bet my income would be at least 2 * $n/day from the apps combined.

Re: The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android

#72

Post by 001sky »

fpgeek wrote: post #70
001sky wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you code around it? A tablet in the shape of a parallelogram? - She got you | Rhetorical questions != Not False Statements. [Edit: Agree she could have been more informative.]

It's worth noting that Apple won on "rounded rectangles" as they applied to the iPhone (instead of the iPad). That certainly complicates any attempted workarounds.

Did Samsung not cite the Domino in the Prior Art? WTF "a hand-held computing device with a rectangular shape, rounded corners, and devoid of buttons" etc. "it has a touch-enabled surface communication technology called "Braille..."and"infite power supply"[1]

[but if anyone knows?]

[1] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/Dom...

Re: The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android

#73

Post by exodust »

ender7 wrote: post #55
spaghetti wrote: post #48

I'd love to see control of the "mobile space" be in the hands of individuals instead of large, for-profit and often evil companies. Clearly mobile computing is here to stay. If it wasn't then companies like apple and google wouldn't be fighting so hard for control. Imagine a decentralized app store where people can make a living without having to deal with apple's ridiculous review process or ideas of what's appropri…

The huge, HUGE advantage that the App Store brings to the average consumer is a feeling of safety. An app installed from the App store: - Can be uninstalled easily, and leave no trace behind (remember "Register cleaners"?) - Cannot interfere with other apps - Cannot run in the background and spy on your surfing habits - Cannot steal your credit card information and upload it to Russian mafia servers For a long time,…

Maybe you're forgetting the whole "why does Angry Birds need to know my phone number and have access to my contacts etc". The iPhone NEEDS a firewall so we can selectively block apps from calling home and sending usage data back every time you use them, and other data that we otherwise did NOT grant permission to do so when we installed the app.

Re: The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android

#74

Post by cageface »

chii wrote: post #54
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing: It doesn't really matter. Take any given software patent and throw a research team at it, chances are you'll find invalidating prior art. Take any given software patent and give it to a CS major, chances are you'll have a work-around inside of a few days. But that's not the problem. The problem is that you never know which patents will be asserted against you, and by that point the horse is out of t…

I think there is a middle ground - patents, if done "properly" is useful. Perhaps, firstly, you have to have a more vigorous application process that is peer reviewed (where peers are basically your competitors!). Secondly, you have to declare the valuation of the patent. This is then taxed by the government, similarly to property tax. If you decide to value your patent at $0, then you pay $0 tax. The valuation of th…

Secondly, you have to declare the valuation of the patent. This is then taxed by the government, similarly to property tax. If you decide to value your patent at $0, then you pay $0 tax.

I'd rather just see software patents thrown out entirely but I think this is the most reasonable suggestion I've seen for fixing the current system. If that tax were rolled back into funding real scrutiny of incoming patents the whole system might not be the cancer it's become now.

Re: The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android

#75

Post by esolyt »

fpgeek wrote: post #69
esolyt wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of them are solved by sandboxing and permission mechanism. "Fuck you, I don't want to waste my time" is actually the response developers should be giving to Apple when they are made to wait more than a month for their app to be reviewed and finally it gets rejected for a political, ideological, arbitrary, or personal (competes with an Apple service) reason.

Much as I love Android, and much as the Android team has done yeoman's work on this front... Sadly, today, the more accurate statement is all of them are theoretically solvable by sandboxing and permissions mechanisms. Getting those sandboxes and permissions where they need to be at a technical level, explaining those permissions to users in a way they can understand and make decisions based on and making the overall…

What I meant was, this is the correct approach. The implementation is not necessarily perfect. But in my opinion, it is much better than Apple's approach, which actually gives the world a bigger problem: A company deciding what software I can install on my device and what software I cannot.

Re: The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android

#76

Post by fpgeek »

esolyt wrote: post #75
fpgeek wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much as I love Android, and much as the Android team has done yeoman's work on this front... Sadly, today, the more accurate statement is all of them are theoretically solvable by sandboxing and permissions mechanisms. Getting those sandboxes and permissions where they need to be at a technical level, explaining those permissions to users in a way they can understand and make decisions based on and making the overall…

What I meant was, this is the correct approach. The implementation is not necessarily perfect. But in my opinion, it is much better than Apple's approach, which actually gives the world a bigger problem: A company deciding what software I can install on my device and what software I cannot.

Yes, absolutely.

I just think it is important to remember where the weaknesses are and why some people are making an alternative tradeoff.

Re: The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android

#77

Post by conroe64 »

001sky wrote: post #72
fpgeek wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth noting that Apple won on "rounded rectangles" as they applied to the iPhone (instead of the iPad). That certainly complicates any attempted workarounds.

Did Samsung not cite the Domino in the Prior Art? WTF "a hand-held computing device with a rectangular shape, rounded corners, and devoid of buttons" etc. "it has a touch-enabled surface communication technology called "Braille..."and"infite power supply"[1] [but if anyone knows?] [1] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/Dom...

The Domino can be disregarded. Only prior art that can run software compatible with Apple hardware can be considered. The Jury foreman explained it better than I could as follows:

The software on the Apple side could not be placed into the processor on the prior art and vice versa. That means they are not interchangeable. That changed everything right there.

Re: The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android

#78

Post by Dylan16807 »

chii wrote: post #54
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing: It doesn't really matter. Take any given software patent and throw a research team at it, chances are you'll find invalidating prior art. Take any given software patent and give it to a CS major, chances are you'll have a work-around inside of a few days. But that's not the problem. The problem is that you never know which patents will be asserted against you, and by that point the horse is out of t…

I think there is a middle ground - patents, if done "properly" is useful. Perhaps, firstly, you have to have a more vigorous application process that is peer reviewed (where peers are basically your competitors!). Secondly, you have to declare the valuation of the patent. This is then taxed by the government, similarly to property tax. If you decide to value your patent at $0, then you pay $0 tax. The valuation of th…

Clever. Especially if you charge some of that tax up front and use that to put up a bounty for invalidating the patent.

Re: The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android

#79

Post by Dylan16807 »

conroe64 wrote: post #77
001sky wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did Samsung not cite the Domino in the Prior Art? WTF "a hand-held computing device with a rectangular shape, rounded corners, and devoid of buttons" etc. "it has a touch-enabled surface communication technology called "Braille..."and"infite power supply"[1] [but if anyone knows?] [1] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/Dom...

The Domino can be disregarded. Only prior art that can run software compatible with Apple hardware can be considered. The Jury foreman explained it better than I could as follows: The software on the Apple side could not be placed into the processor on the prior art and vice versa. That means they are not interchangeable. That changed everything right there.

How can that restriction be applied to prior art but not the Samsung device?

Re: The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android

#80

Post by fpgeek »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #79
conroe64 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Domino can be disregarded. Only prior art that can run software compatible with Apple hardware can be considered. The Jury foreman explained it better than I could as follows: The software on the Apple side could not be placed into the processor on the prior art and vice versa. That means they are not interchangeable. That changed everything right there.

How can that restriction be applied to prior art but not the Samsung device?

In the world where he's looking for a reason his patent wasn't completely anticipated by TiVo (or ReplayTV or ...): http://www.google.com/patents/US7352953
Post reply on HN