This is lazy journalism. Will people stop posting what Steve Wozniak thinks about everything? Just because he's Steve Wozniak doesn't make him a foremost expert on everything related to technology. Does this quote add any insight or value at all? “I don’t agree with it — very small things I don’t really call that innovative. I wish everybody would just agree to exchange all the patents and everybody can build the bes…
Actually it does. The man is not claiming to be an expert on technology, however he did help co-create one of the most successful and profitable companies in history. You have an opinion, why shouldn't he?
Steve Wozniak on Samsung patent verdict: ‘I hate it and I don’t agree with it’
71–80 of 111 posts
Re: Steve Wozniak on Samsung patent verdict: ‘I hate it and I don’t agree with it’
#72I hope he's right that this gets reversed. Apple makes a lot of best-in-class products (and I know some people that think everything they make is best-in-class). Do they think they need to do this kind of litigation to keep making products people will buy? Are they trying to discredit Samsung as copycats? Or is it just a case of "if it costs us $100m to pursue 10 lawsuits with a 5% chance of any one of them getting u…
For the dozenth time: this is not some radical choice Apple made. Apple is, as a public company, responsible to act in its own interest within the current economic system. The system is screwed up, but that doesn't mean that any single company has a responsibility to unilaterally disarm.
Re: Steve Wozniak on Samsung patent verdict: ‘I hate it and I don’t agree with it’
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what if the other side doesn't want to settle? Isn't the threat of injunction a large part of what drives infringers to settle on a royalty or stop infringement?
The reporting as it stands is that Apple's demands (something like $30/unit I think?) weren't something that could be meaningfully "negotiated". Obviously there's complexity here, but the same logic goes the other way: if Samsung felt they could get a significant discount on that $1B award via negotiation, surely they would have cut that deal, no?
It could very well be that Apple was inflexible on the $30 figure but to me a starting offer of $30/unit implies a settlement somewhere at or below $20/unit. Also note that the Apple offer included significant discounts that could wittle the per unit cost down by 20%/40%/60% for various things (or up to 100% if they also used Windows Phone instead of Android).
A settlement at $15 a unit with a 40%-60% discount would only be $6-$9 a unit. Considering Samsung pays Microsoft $5-$10 a unit this doesn't seem all that crazy.
Re: Steve Wozniak on Samsung patent verdict: ‘I hate it and I don’t agree with it’
#74I feel like the craziness is only just beginning.
It has long since begun. It is beyond me, why everyone chooses to ignore Nokia's taking a chunk out of Apple and Microsoft taking a chunk out of HTC, Samsung and Barnes & Nobles. Apple's case isn't anything new.
What is new about the Apple case is that they appear to be using patents to completely block competitors from the market, and making a huge amount of noise about how other companies are "blatantly copying" things like slide-to-unlock.
Microsoft have been extracting money from Android manufacturers for a while now, but the public don't know and don't care. If Microsoft were to go around making noise about Android being copy-cats and stealing their ideas, people would be even more angry with them than they are with Apple (being Microsoft).
The argument that often goes around HN that "Nokia started it" completely misses the point of what Apple are doing.
Re: Steve Wozniak on Samsung patent verdict: ‘I hate it and I don’t agree with it’
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looking at the iPhone 5, and when Apple started to go litigation crazy I think a couple factors have combined to force them to go this way. 1. The iPhone 5 is an incremental update to the iPhone 4 template. It doesn't mean it's a bad product, it actually looks like it's a very very nice device. But it isn't the leapfrog over the competition that people have come to expect and Apple has built its smartphone business a…
But it isn't the leapfrog over the competition that people have come to expect... I think this is their biggest problem. They see & take a few opportunities to be disruptive, and now people are expecting them to be disruptive every frickin' time they have a press announcement. People don't appreciate how rare such opportunities arise, how rarer still to be able to spot them and exploit them, and rarer still to do it…
Re: Steve Wozniak on Samsung patent verdict: ‘I hate it and I don’t agree with it’
#76The truth is everyone has been and is suing Apple, all the time. http://c4sif.org/2012/04/web-of-tech-patent-lawsuits-infogra... This graphic is now 9 month old. Truth is Apple is the most sued company in tech! I just don't get this 'down with Apple' mentality. It's completely irrational.
When Apple entered the phone telecom industry, it turned telecoms on their head. Apple started to take control from these awful companies (see my article on t-mobile: http://news.nucleusdevelopment.com/2012/09/11/t-mobile-infla...) and give it to consumers. Remember verizon didn't want any part of the iPhone because 'it gave the consumer too much control'?
Google and Samsung have been helping the telecoms regain control, allowing crapware and bloatware to go right back on the phones. That is one of the very things that Apple fought so hard to keep off their phones, and one of the main reasons Verizon didn't initially want Apple as a vendor. Not to mention, The spyware that gets installed with out our knowledge, ie: Carrier IQ. Controlling the software OS on the phones (ei: why it takes so long to get a new version of Android on your existing phone).
Re: Steve Wozniak on Samsung patent verdict: ‘I hate it and I don’t agree with it’
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it isn't the leapfrog over the competition that people have come to expect... I think this is their biggest problem. They see & take a few opportunities to be disruptive, and now people are expecting them to be disruptive every frickin' time they have a press announcement. People don't appreciate how rare such opportunities arise, how rarer still to be able to spot them and exploit them, and rarer still to do it…
Well, I guess when your announcement is based around language like "The biggest thing to happen to iphone since iphone", people are going to expect some big changes. Expectations might have been lower if they'd downplayed it a bit and called it iPhone 4X.
Re: Steve Wozniak on Samsung patent verdict: ‘I hate it and I don’t agree with it’
#78We know Woz is an 'outside looking in' type person. His remarks remind me of all the people who are really upset with Apple for pursuing this lawsuit. People seem to have this conception that Apple saw an opportunity to sue the pants of a harmless company so it did. This is not the case at all. The two corporations were in meetings with lawyers for a year trying to iron out a deal. The deals fell through and they wen…
Re: Steve Wozniak on Samsung patent verdict: ‘I hate it and I don’t agree with it’
#79I am not taking sides. Don't have all the data. I'll just say that there's a huge difference between "Research & Development" and only "Development". The first is far more time consuming, risky and expensive. The second is a clear and guided roadmap that you simply follow to completion. I used to be an idealist. I bought the whole idea of "just build a better product" without question. And so I did. Many years ago I…
OK, the problem with your argument is this bit: " Eight months later competitors came out with devices offering about 60% of what we were doing at half the price. It nearly killed the business " If the HTC G1 "nearly killed" the iPhone 3G, then you might have an argument. Though it would depend in sensitive ways on things like whether or not Apple had made back its R&D costs over the year of Insanely Great iPhone sal…
Mine is just one example of a real-life situation where someone got royally shafted for not having patent protection. I had major multinational corporation copying my designs, marketing materials, and more. I even had customers asking me if I had gone into a joint venture or licensing agreement with some of these competitors because of how blatant the copying had been. One or two patents would have stopped a lot of this on its tracks. Of course, part of the "business is war" aspect of things is whether or not you have enough of a financial war-chest to engage in litigation.
One of the reasons I did not go and file for a couple of patents was my natural drive, as an engineer, to just want to build it. Second was my stupid idealism at the time. I truly believed that if I just built a better product I'd always be ahead of the pack, even if they attempted to copy my work. I would later learn hard lessons when facing the consequences of these dumb, stupid decisions.
Keep in mind that I have huge problems with the patent system. I have read through hundreds of patents. Most of them are pure unrefined manure. Bullshit patents. And, yes, I felt that some aspects of the patents I was going to file for where bullshit.
I came out of school with this dumb-ass idealistic idea that makes a distinction between true invention and implementation. Engineers solve problems and implement solutions every day. These are not patentable inventions. True inventions are, non-obvious, blah, blah, blah. What a shock was it to discover that the patent office willingly hands off patents for implementation, not invention. Hell, they don't even do that, they are handing you patents for ideas, you know, the shit you are not supposed to be able to patent!
If you read through hundreds of patents and are intimately familiar with both the subject matter as well as the industry to which these patents are relevant it doesn't take long to realize that people are getting patents for napkin ideas as opposed to true realized invention.
And, don't get me started on software patents. I bet that if you were creative enough you could get a patent on the "do" loop, even today.
Boldly armed with all of this baggage and idealistic bullshit I trotted forward and built my product without filing for a single patent. It didn't take long to learn the lesson that was waiting for me around the corner.
Patents, like them or not, have become weapons of the war business can be. I can count with one hand the people I would trust without solid legal paperwork (be it patents or other instruments). I have been shafted by people who singed NDA's and then went out and used what they learned from me to go raise funding and become a competitor.
Again, its' "D" vs "R&D". They must have sounded like geniuses in front of the investors with all the product and market knowledge they stole from me. Thankfully, in that case, they ended-up failing miserably (not before causing me some financial pain) because of the fact that they had no knowledge or insights of their own. You can only go so far without a real connection to what you are doing.
I see this Apple vs. Samsung thing both ways. As I said before, I don't know who's right or wrong and don't have the time to figure it out. We'll see what happens.