Apple Patent on Touch Typing, Multitouch Upheld; Allows Ban on Most Androids

Post by ignostic » Mon, Oct 21, 2013, 3:45 PM UTC

ignostic wrote: post #26

JulianMorrison wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hardware patents shouldn't exist. Business method patents shouldn't exist. Drug patents shouldn't exist. Gene patents shouldn't exist. All patents are bad.

My opinions on patents are still evolving, but I tend to see drug patents as a good thing that needs reform. I know it's a bit of a tangent, but would someone mind explaining a little? My main concern is that we can't expect anyone to invest m/billions in necessary drug research if they can be copied the instant the drug shows success. The R&D cost per new drug brought to market is often between 1-12 billion.[1] Even…

Post by josephlord » Mon, Oct 21, 2013, 4:04 PM UTC

shmerl wrote: post #49

acjohnson55 wrote: post #40

As I type on my MacBook Pro, I also wonder at what point we as a community are going to start voting with our wallets against Apple and the extent to which they are abusing the broken US patent system. Of course it's only rational to expect that they will use any means at their disposal to get a competitive advantage, but that doesn't mean that we must reserve moral judgment. For me, Apple has already moved into "pre…

> I also wonder at what point we as a community are going to start voting with our wallets against Apple and the extent to which they are abusing the broken US patent system. Good question. I never used any Apple products and never will. While they definitely made others try to compete with them, at the same time they held back many important technologies. For example audio and video codecs. Why don't we see open cod…

Post by gibwell » Mon, Oct 21, 2013, 4:15 PM UTC

kunai wrote: post #41

acjohnson55 wrote: post #40

As I type on my MacBook Pro, I also wonder at what point we as a community are going to start voting with our wallets against Apple and the extent to which they are abusing the broken US patent system. Of course it's only rational to expect that they will use any means at their disposal to get a competitive advantage, but that doesn't mean that we must reserve moral judgment. For me, Apple has already moved into "pre…

People don't care about their despotic and toxic environment for the little guys or competitors because they have the best products. That seems to be changing as Android increases in marketshare every day, and Ultrabooks are taking off while Mac marketshare generally has remained stagnant over the past 8 quarters. So, it seems like we already are moving away from Apple. The only thing they can do is now rely on petty…

Post by gibwell » Mon, Oct 21, 2013, 4:22 PM UTC

shmerl wrote: post #54

josephlord wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vorbis doesn't have hardware support on many chipsets which means that battery life would not be as good as for MP3/AAC. I find it quite hard to see Apple as evil for implementing International Standards and while they are not free (or Free software compatible) they are open. There are plenty of good reasons for not adding support to additional codecs without good reason to. 1) Different (and confusing) compatibility…

Adding Vorbis in hardware is not hard. The reason it's not usually added is because of Apple precisely, since they are one of the major manufacturers of hardware players. I.e. if they'd add support for Vorbis, it will become widespread pretty soon. So your argument is reversed. And, in mobile SoCs it is gaining traction now, because of Google and WebM. Hardware players are a bigger problem. 1) There is nothing confus…

Post by josephlord » Mon, Oct 21, 2013, 4:23 PM UTC

Oletros wrote: post #19

threeseed wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please understand what prior art means before talking about it again. And Apple acquired these patents from Fingerworks who predated Microsoft Surface by nearly a decade.

That patents has nothing to do with Fingerworks.